Understanding the habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. A multilevel relational study.
Joana Vassilopoulou
A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of East Anglia, Norwich Business School
January 2011
© This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with the author and that no quotation from the thesis, nor any information derived there from, may be published without the author's prior, written consent. Declaration of Authorship
I, Joana Vassilopoulou, declare that this thesis and the study presented in it are my own. I confirm that I have done this study while in candidature for a research degree at the University of East Anglia. The material has not been previously accepted, in whole or in part, for any other degree. Where I have quoted from the work of others, the source is always given. Parts of this thesis have been presented in conferences or published as:
Conferences:
• Vassilopoulou, J. (2009): Understanding the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. EOI, Istanbul. • Vassilopoulou, J. (2009): Understanding the resistance. Managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Going diverse conference, RWTH Aachen. • Vassilopoulou, J. and Koal, I. (2008): Inklusion von Personen mit Migrationshintergrund durch Managing Diversity? Nationalität, Ethnizität, Migrationshintergrund, Freie Universität Berlin.
Publications:
• Vassilopoulou, J. (2009): Ethnic monitoring in Britain. Dossier, Ethnic Monitoring, Datenerhebung über, oder mit Minderheiten? Heinrich-Böll Stiftung, Berlin. • Al Ariss, A., Vassilopoulou, J. and Özbilgin, M. (2012): A Multilevel Understanding of the Careers of Minority Ethnic Elites. In: Kakabadse, A. and Kakabadse, N. (eds.) (2012): Elites: The Opaque Nature of Transnational Policy Determination. Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Signature Date Joana Vassilopoulou January 2011
2
Abstract
Drawing on Bourdieu (1990, 1994, 1998) and Layder (1993, 1998) this study provides a critical realist account of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Using a multilevel, contextual and relational analytical framework, I interpret and operationalise Bourdieu’s key concepts, field, habitus and symbolic violence in the organisational context in order to examine macro, meso and micro level influences on the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. The aim of this study is not only to contribute to an understanding of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany, but also to understand the resistance of organisations to manage ethnic diversity, since organisations in Germany still do not view managing ethnic diversity as pertinent. Lastly, this study examines the implementation of the diversity management concept in the German context as well as the underlying organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in order to understand if the inclusion of ethnic minorities is achievable through the management of ethnic diversity in the German context. In order to do so, this study employs multiple data sources: documentary data, semi-structured interviews with stakeholders, visual data, a focus group, oberservations, a research diary and a single company case study of a German subsidiary of a North American Multinational Corporation (MNC).
The thesis demonstrates the importance of considering history and particularly the treatment of history in organisational research, since this study illustrates that the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity is trapped in history, to be precise in the treatment of the German Nazi-past. Moreover, the thesis reveals two underlying hidden mechanisms, which guide and constitute the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. These mechanisms are symbolic violence and integracism, which both undermine the overdue proposal of race equality, equal opportunities and the management of ethnic diversity at work.
3 Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to thank Professors Mustafa Özbilgin and Doctor Annilee Game for their excellent supervision and for being most rigorous critics of my work. Both have been always supportive, encouraging and inspiring throughout my PhD. I cannot thank them enough for taking this PhD journey with me. However, I would particularly like to thank Mustafa for endless streams of inspiration during various occasions, which not only enhanced my research but also my private life.
My sincere gratitude goes to Professor Iris Koal and Verena Bruchhagen, who supported my application for a research studentship. Without their support and encouragement I would not have come to Britain to carry out this study. I would like to thank to Norwich Business School, University of East Anglia, for sponsoring this project and offering a stimulating and supportive environment.
I am thankful to all individuals who devoted their time to participate in the interviews and the company case study. Without the insights they offered this thesis could not have been written. Special thanks are due to Arno Bischop and Martina-Diana Dolderer for their invaluable support in helping me securing access for the stakeholder interviews and the company case study.
Finally, more personal debts of gratitude are to my mother who supported me during this PhD, as well as throughout my life. I also would like to thank my friends who never stopped listening to my endless streams of complains throughout this long journey.
Thank you all for your support.
4 Table of contents
Declaration of Authorship...... 2 Acknowledgements...... 4 Table of contents ...... 5
Chapter One Introduction...... 9
1.1 Introduction...... 9 1.2 Rationale for this study ...... 11 1.3 Research questions...... 16 1.4 Thesis structure ...... 17
Chapter Two The tyranny of history ...... 23
2.1 Introduction...... 23 2.2 The importance of history for diversity management research ...... 24 2.3 The burden of guilt and current racism in Germany...... 27 2.4 What is a German? Legislating national identity, today and in the past...... 29 2.5 Civil service in Germany: a closed sector for non-German citizens ...... 36 2.6 Availability of terms regarding ethnic minorities and racism ...... 38 2.7 Absence of ethnic data monitoring practices...... 42 2.8 Conclusion ...... 47
Chapter Three Integration as a dominant discourse of managing ethnic diversity...... 50
3.1 Introduction...... 50 3.2 Post-war migrants in Germany ...... 52 3.2.1 Turks in Germany...... 56 3.2.2 The employment profile of immigrants in Germany...... 58 3.3 Racial discrimination in employment in Germany ...... 61 3.4 Is there an anti-discrimination culture in Germany?...... 64 3.5 Integration versus anti-discrimination, race equality or diversity management..... 70 3.5.1 Theory of integration...... 71 3.5.2 Theory of integration in Germany...... 77 3.5.3 The ethnocentric discourse and policies on integration ...... 79 3.5.4 Racist undertones of the notion of integration in Germany: Integracism ...... 85 3.6 Conclusion ...... 87
5 Chapter Four Diversity management: theory and practice...... 89
4.1 Introduction...... 89 4.2 Evolution of diversity management: theory and practice ...... 90 4.3 Diversity management in Germany ...... 96 4.4 Global diversity management ...... 101 4.5 Conclusion ...... 104
Chapter Five Methodology ...... 106
5.1 Introduction...... 106 5.2 Research philosophy ...... 106 5.3 Research design ...... 111 5.3.1 Research framework...... 111 5.3.2 Literature review ...... 119 5.3.3 Data collection...... 120 5.3.3.1 Research access ...... 120 5.3.3.2 Fieldwork...... 122 5.3.3.3 Stakeholder interviews ...... 123 5.3.3.4 Documentary review and observations ...... 127 5.3.3.5 Visual data...... 130 5.3.3.6 Company case study...... 131 5.4 Data analysis ...... 135 5.5 Issues of reflexivity...... 136 5.5.1 Reflexivity ...... 136 5.5.2 My personal background ...... 138 5.6 Research ethics ...... 144 5.7 Conclusion ...... 146
Chapter Six Analysis I: Symbolic violence as mechanism of habitus...... 148
6.1 Introduction...... 148 6.2 Linguistic violence: If we do not talk about it, we are not doing it...... 152 6.3 Visual violence ...... 157 6.4 Conclusion ...... 160
Chapter Seven Analysis II: Integracism as mechanism of habitus...... 161
7.1 Introduction...... 161 7.2 The construction of citizenship, national and citizen identities...... 162 7.2.1 No political power for ethnic minority Turks...... 168 7.2.2 Ethnic minority Turks, excluded from working in civil service ...... 170 7.3 Integracism in employment. No need for race equality? ...... 172 7.4 Where are the highly skilled ethnic minority workers in Germany? ...... 188 7.5 Conclusions...... 199
6 Chapter Eight Analysis III: Diversity management in Germany, in the context of field, habitus and agency...... 203
8.1 Introduction...... 203 8.2 The field of diversity management in Germany ...... 204 8.3 The organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany ...... 217 8.3.1 Description of the company...... 218 8.3.1.1 History of the company ...... 218 8.3.1.2 The matrix structure ...... 219 8.3.1.3 The global diversity management approach of the MNC ...... 221 8.3.1.4 The German plants ...... 226 8.3.1.5 Workforce structure of the German plants ...... 227 8.3.2 The organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity...... 233 8.4 The agency of diversity management stakeholder...... 245 8.5 Conclusion ...... 249
Chapter Nine Discussion and conclusion ...... 253
9.1 Introduction...... 253 9.2 Revisiting the research questions...... 253 9.2.1 How does the larger historical context manifest in the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity and in the agency of diversity management stakeholders in Germany? ...... 254 9.2.2 How does symbolic violence manifest in the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany and in the agency of diversity management stakeholders?...... 258 9.2.3 What is the nature of the relationship between the notion of integration and diversity management in Germany? ...... 262 9.3 Original contribution...... 264 9.3.1 Theoretical contribution ...... 264 9.3.2 Methodological contribution ...... 267 9.3.3 Implications for policy and practice ...... 269 9.7 Research limitations...... 274 9.8 Suggestions for future research...... 275 9.9 Concluding remarks...... 277
Bibliography ...... 279
Appendices...... 305
Appendix I: Original interview guide for interviews with stakeholder ...... 305 Appendix II: Original interview guide for the interviews with case study company employees...... 313 Appendix III: Original interview guide for the interviews with case study company manager ...... 319 Appendix IV: Original interview guide for the interviews with members of the Human Resource department in the case study company...... 323
7
List of tables
Table 1: The three Strategies of Global Diversity Management...... 103
Table 2: Conceptual framework...... 112
Table 3: Layder’s Research Map ...... 116
Table 4: Demographic profile of diversity and equality stakeholders ...... 124
Table 5: Demographic profile of migrant representatives of the observed plenary discussion...... 129
Table 6: Demographic profile of interview participants from the case study company ...... 133
Table 7: Demographic profile of focus group participants from the case study company ...... 134
Table 8: The Matrix structure of the case study company by regional dimensions...... 220
Table 9: The diversity management strategy of the case study company...... 222
Table 10: Focus areas of the diversity business councils from the case study company ...... 224
Table 11: Employees of non-German nationality from the Case study company ...... 228
Table 12: Job positions by sex from the case study company ...... 230
Table 13: Structure of the HR department in the case study company...... 232
8 Chapter One
Introduction
1.1 Introduction
This study draws on Bourdieu (1999, 1994) and critical realist scholar Layder (1993, 1998) and is based on a contextual, multilevel and multilayered analysis of organisational reality. Using a relational and analytical framework, I interpret and operationalise Bourdieu’s key concepts, field, habitus and symbolic violence in the organisational context, in order to explore and explain macro, meso and micro level influences on the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. There is a startling resistance on side of organisations to manage ethnic diversity (Köppel et al. 2007). Aiming to understand why organisations yet keep being resistant against managing ethnic diversity and if the inclusion of ethnic minorities is achievable through the management of ethnic diversity, this study examines the implementation of the diversity management concept in the German context as well as the underlying organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity.
To begin with, this study considers the larger historical context in order to understand the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Acknowledging the importance of the larger historical context provides insights about how a particular feature of social life evolved in its current form. The element of history represents the temporal dimension of this thesis, through which all the other elements move (Layder 1993). This PhD study illustrates that the post-holocaust collective guilt shaped the contemporary diversity management agenda in such a way that race related issues are excluded from it. For instance, the discrimination topic is marked by a collective silence. This silence affects not only the field of diversity management, but also the organisational adoption of the diversity management concept in Germany. Additionally, terms such as racism are taboo in Germany, or only used in relation
9 to violent forms of racism and not for example in relation to racism at work. Considering these insights, I argue that it is of vast importance not only to concentrate on the history itself, but also to focus on the treatment of history. This is of vast importance, since empirical evidence suggests that the currently in Germany existing organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity is trapped in history.
This PhD research contributes to an understanding of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany, in revealing two underlying and hidden mechanisms, which guide and constitute the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. The two indentified mechanisms are symbolic violence and integracism. It is shown how symbolic violence and integracism as mechanisms of habitus influence the development of a shared habitus that produces and reproduces practice, namely patterns of behaviour. A practice that neglects issues of race equality in the management of ethnic diversity in Germany.
Bourdieu defines symbolic violence as a partly unconscious instrument of domination, which imposes symbolism and meaning upon subordinated groups or classes in order to reproduce and secure the social relations of domination (Jenkins 1992; Bourdieu 1994). Symbolic violence takes place in such a way that exclusion and inclusion are experienced as legitimate. This legitimacy shadows the existing power relations and makes them often unrecognisable to and invisible to individuals who experience them. Thereby, individuals consent to the dominant values and the behavioural schema currently utilised in the field (Kim 2004).
Providing an account of how visual symbolic violence manifests against people of Turkish ethnicity in Germany, I demonstrate how symbolic violence is exercised against people of Turkish ethnicity. Ethnic minority Turks are the most problematised ethnic minority group in the German context. Visual symbolic violence is about the visual representation of ethnic minorities in a way, which undermines diversity of their experiences, agency and humanity (Weber-Menges 2005). For instance, not employing workers of Turkish ethnicity is legitimated in
10 my study with internalised arguments referring to people of Turkish ethnicity being deficient across various job criteria. These insights might explain why organisations still view the management of ethnic diversity as pertinent. Additionally, examining linguistic symbolic violence revealed that German language is ill equipped to offer a vocabulary of resistance concerning race related issues. By not providing suitable terms concerning race discrimination and by silencing race related issues the established hierarchy remains untouched and members of ethnic minorities are silenced.
The second identified underlying mechanism of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany is integracism. I define integracism as the racial biased, ethnocentric notion of integration, currently present in the German context. This study illustrates that in Germany the dominant concept of integration, which can be understood as a notion of assimilation, opposes to the notion of diversity management, which possibly explains the fact that German companies do not view the management of ethnic diversity as pertinent. As Wrench (2001: 5) argues the objective of diversity management “ (…) is not to assimilate minorities (and women) into the dominant white (and male) organisational culture but to create a dominant heterogeneous culture”. I moreover argue, based on the findings of this thesis, that the notion of integration does not recognise the exclusionary racist practices and structures within German society and also within German organisations. This must be viewed as a major error, when aiming for the inclusion of ethnic minorities through diversity management.
1.2 Rationale for this study
There were a number of reasons for choosing to study the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Germany received a considerable high number of immigrants since after the Second World War. Today Germany has the third largest number of international immigrants in the world (IOM 2010). The number of immigrant inflows has been continuously rising for decades. Despite of this, Germany had difficulties accepting the fact of being an immigration country
11 for a long time. This resistance was then reflected in governmental immigration policies, which aimed on excluding immigrants, particularly in economical hard times, rather than including them into the German labour market. However, in view of recent developments, such as labour shortages and a shaky welfare state due to demographic change and declining numbers of immigration inflows, there is an obvious need to bring the management of immigrants and immigration into a new direction. The notion of diversity management could be one possible means addressing this challenge.
Such new direction is particularly necessary considering the alarming outcomes of a recent study on right-wing attitudes by the Friedrich-Ebert Foundation. The study suggests that more than thirty percent of people believed foreigners overran the country and that when jobs are scarce foreigners should be sent back to their own country. The study also showed that roughly the same number thought that some 16 million of Germany's immigrants or people with foreign origins had come to the country for its social benefits (Decker et al. 2010). More dramatically this study also indicates that
far-right attitudes are deeply rooted in German society and that more than than one-tenth would like a "Führer" -- the survey deliberately used the German word for "leader" that is associated with Adolf Hitler -- who would govern the country "with a firm hand" for the benefit of all (Reissmann 2010: 1).
These are only some findings of the study by the Friedrich-Ebert Foundation. In summary, it has been argued by the researchers that there is a rise in decidedly anti-democratic and racist attitudes in 2010. The recent economic crisis is seen as a possible reason for the increase in right-wing attitudes. Most importantly the study also showes that right-wing extremist attitudes exist in all social groups and in all age groups, regardless of employment status, educational level or gender (Decker et al. 2010).
12 However, diversity management has become a topic, both in the German management and scholarly debate, since the late 1990s. Thomas (1990) argued, that in the case of USA, diversity management might provide an optimal way to include ethnic minority groups, to consequently benefit the organisations in the long term. In the USA and the UK diversity is sometimes criticised for failing to integrate ethnic minorities (Kersten 2000). In Germany the situation is even more problematic since organisational diversity management approaches largely ignore ethnic minority members. Moreover
German companies also account for the biggest share of companies seeing cultural diversity as the result of demographic constraints, which do not provide any further benefit (Köppel et al. 2007: 11).
This level of resistance is surprising, considering that the integration of unused European working population potential, which includes females, aged, and the ethnic minority population, is needed (Fotakis 2000) to balance the effect of increasing labour shortages and an insecure welfare state (Esping-Anderson 2001) due to demographic change as a result of ageing societies (Healy and Schwarz- Woelzl 2007; European Commission 2007).
Recently, the German government is promoting organisational diversity management as a tool for the better integration of ethnic minority workers. Yet, this governmental attempt remains unfulfilled, as organisations still do not view managing ethnic diversity as important (Köppel et al. 2007). The organisational resistance to take on diversity initiatives renders governmental attempts to make best use of working potential of minority ethnic population. What remains unexplained is, why these organisations are holding back to manage ethnic diversity.
While the German government gives the impression that it is seriously promoting diversity management for the better integration of ethnic minorities, the recent and past political and also public debates concerned with ethnic minorities
13 opposes this impression dramatically. This study suggests that the German government is only paying lip service and that measures regarding the inclusion of ethnic minority workers are not taken seriously. For instance Fairclough (2003) pointed out in the UK, that governments “see a large part of their role as creating the financial, infrastructural and `human resources´ conditions for success in the highly competitive global economy” (Fairclough 2003: 20). The same does apply to the government in Germany. In order to create the needed human resources conditions for the future, pressured by forthcoming labour force shortage due to demographic change, the German government recently changed its discourse related to ethnic minorities. The German public and political debate is now focusing on the need to deal constructively with its diverse population, particularly in terms of ethnicity.
Thus, lately terms such as ‘valuing diversity’ and diversity management have appeared increasingly in the debate (Integration Commissary Maria Böhmer 2007; FC 2007). However, changing discourse gives no guarantee for social change. As Fairclough (2003) states, socially constructive effects of discourse are contingent upon resistance of structure and habitus. Achieving cultural, social and organisational change requires not only discourse change, but also interventions at different levels, and structures and habituses have to be targeted. Furthermore, Nash (2002) indicates the relevance of habitus for the explanation of social phenomena, “To be adequate and sufficient, a social explanation requires an account in which system properties, habituated dispositions, and effective practices are all included” (Nash 2002: 273). Habitus in this manner is understood as
… a system of durable, transposable dispositions, structured structures predisposed to function as structuring structures, that is, as principle which generate and organise practices and representations that can be objectively adapted to their outcomes without presupposing a conscious aiming at ends or an express mastery of the operations necessary in order to attain them (Bourdieu 1990: 53).
14 The problem in Germany is that governmental interventions are only concentrated on the change of discourse and are missing to target different levels, such as structures and habitusses. This possibly explains that organisations are still resistant to the attempted social and organisational change and that the inclusion of ethnic minorities remains refused.
The by the government recommended integration of ethnic minority workers contradict with obsolete organisational strategies, which are developed over the time to preserve the status of the dominant groups. Following Bourdieu and Wacquant (1992), such strategies are influencing organisational processes and structures. This means that also the adoption, the content and the mode of operation of organisational diversity management concepts are influenced by those strategies as by the underlying habitus. In order to achieve organisational change in Germany, this habitus has to be revealed, understood and then targeted through interventions. This is only possible in relating individual activities to objective structure, in
… situating individuals within the context of the organisation and in their relations to each other, as well as by situating the organisation and organisational culture within the context of society and history… (Özbilgin and Tatli 2005: 856).
Bourdieu provides a clear connection between structural positions, motivating dispositions and habitus (Atkinson 2007: 544) in order to link agency and structure (Lipscomb 2006: 176; Berard 2005: 196). Exactly this clear connection is missing for example in Gidden´s theory of structuration, which he developed to explain and integrate agency and structure, in order to understand how social action is regulated. However, Giddens could not relate for example choices and motivations in order to explain social differentiation. Bourdieu applies, based on Berger and Luckmann (1966), the approach “that objective structures have subjective consequences, is not incompatible with the view that the social world is constructed by individual actors” (Swartz 1997: 97) and that the existence of
15 habitus is merely possible in the course of and because of the actors practices, their interaction with each other as well as with the rest of their environment. In particular this link between agency and structure gives a basis to theory building in organisational research. Regarding this, the Bourdieuan perspective offers a more satisfying and nuanced approach to explore in-depth organisational issues of managing ethnic diversity.
Additionally, German diversity management literature fails to consider layers of society, across time and place. However, such an approach offers the possibility to fulfil the obvious need for adequate concepts in the field of theory and research, and politics and management practice (Glastra 1996).
1.3 Research questions
This thesis aims to explore the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany through investigation of macro, meso and micro level influences on the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity. Aiming to understand why organisations yet keep being resistant against managing ethnic diversity and if the inclusion of ethnic minorities is achievable through the management of ethnic diversity, three research questions are set out to explore the issue in a multilevel and relational framework. These research questions are:
a) How does the larger historical context manifest in the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany and in the agency of diversity management stakeholders? b) How does symbolic violence manifest in the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany and in the agency of diversity management stakeholders? c) What is the nature of the relationship between the notion of integration and diversity management in Germany?
16 1.4 Thesis structure
As mentioned earlier in the introduction, this study draws on Bourdieu (1984, 1994, 1998) and critical realist scholar Layder (1993, 1998) and is based on a contextual, multilevel and multilayered analysis of organisational reality. Utilising Layder’s research map has been a useful instrument in structuring this research project and this thesis. Layder (1993) proposes a research map, which describes levels of social organisation, which are potential areas of research in exploratory fieldwork. I adopted all five levels of analysis for this study, which are history, context, setting, situated activity and the self. All levels are closely interrelated, but for research and analytical purpose they have been scrutinised separately. However, this does not mean that interrelations have not been taken into account.
This thesis consists of nine chapters. The present Chapter, Introduction, presents the research aim, a brief overview of the macro context of managing ethnic diversity, the rational for this study and poses three research questions, which this thesis seeks to investigate. Then, the structure of the thesis is introduced.
In Chapter Two, the tyranny of history, I present an account to what Layder calls the “general dimension of history.” This chapter is deliberately called the tyranny of history and not for example the historical context of diversity management in Germany as it highlights how the treatment of history and not history itself undermines the development of measures regarding for instance race equality at work. The chapter starts with a section that draws attention to and discusses the importance of history for diversity management research. This chapter aims to build a relation between the burden of guilt, a result of the German Nazi-Past, and current racism in Germany. In examining literature on the current and past German legislation of national identity, the chapter then aims to answer the question of “What is a German?”. This is followed by an example of how the tyranny of history influences for instance employment regulations in the public sector. After this, the chapter discusses how the treatment of the German Nazi- past perpetuates the development of an emancipatory vocabulary in terms of race equality. In the main, this chapter shows that the post-holocaust collective guilt shaped the contemporary diversity management agenda in such a way that race related issues are excluded from it.
In Chapter Three, the notion of integration as a dominant discourse of managing ethnic diversity, presents the policy and social context of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. According to Layder (1993), the context gives account to for example forms of social and economic organisation, power relations and state interventions. The chapter starts with a description of post-war migration to Germany and focuses then on ethnic minority Turks in Germany. Although not the largest group in Germany, ethnic minority Turks are the most problematised group in the public and political debate, which also materialised in all interviews carried out in the course of this study. The next section addresses racial discrimination in employment in Germany, followed by a description and discussion of the weak anti-discrimination culture in Germany. Afterwards the chapter comes to its core in giving account to the concept of integration, which dominates the discourse of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. This is done in providing firstly an overview of international theory of integration. Then the chapter continues in reviewing literature on the theory of integration as it is in the German context, which includes an analysis of the ethnocentric discourse and policies on integration, as well as an examination of the racist undertones of the notion of integration in Germany. In conclusion, this chapter gives an account to the dominance of the concept of integration in the management of ethnic diversity and how the racist undertones and the what Bourdieu (2004) calls “unconscious ethnocentrism” of the notion of integration undermines the overdue call for race quality at work in Germany.
The macro context of diversity management in Germany is examined in Chapter Four. The chapter starts with a brief description of the evolution of diversity management, particularly in countries such as the USA and the UK. Afterwards literature on diversity management in Germany is reviewed. It is shown that the notion of diversity management varies across these countries, particularly when
18 comparing the UK and USA with Germany. The last section of this chapter gives an account to global diversity management. This is particularly relevant as MNC’s increasingly transfer their diversity management strategies to foreign subsidiaries, such as in the case of the case study company examined for this study. In conclusion, this chapter is set out to show that it is relevant to consider the local and particularly historical context of a country, when examining diversity management in particular settings.
Chapter Five, the methodology chapter explains the research philosophy, design and methodology of the research project. Regarding the research philosophy this chapter presents a discussion of critical realism, which underpins this study. The research design is presented next, which includes the research framework. The chapter then explains the specific methodologies adopted in the study. After that I offer a description of the data analysis process. The chapter finally offers a reflexive account of the research process and discusses the issue of ethics in research.
The first part of the analysis is presented in Chapter Six, Analysis I: Symbolic violence as mechanism of habitus. This chapter utilises Bourdieu’s concepts of symbolic violence and habitus (Bourdieu 1994) in order to examine symbolic violence against ethnic minority Turks in Germany. The chapter gives firstly a theoretical account to the Bordieuan concept of symbolic violence. The chapter analyses two different forms of symbolic violence: linguistic and visual symbolic violence. In the main, this chapter provides an account of how symbolic violence manifests against people of Turkish ethnicity in Germany, as exercised through “symbolic elites” and how these cultural mechanisms influence the development of a shared habitus that produces and reproduces practice, namely patterns of behaviour. For instance, failure to employ workers of Turkish ethnicity is legitimated in the case study company with internalised arguments referring to people of Turkish ethnicity being deficient across various job criteria.
19 Building on the context set in Chapter Three, Chapter Seven continues the analysis in focussing on what I named integracism, which refers to a racial biased and ethnocentric notion of integration in Germany. Integracism is analysed in this chapter as mechanism of habitus. This chapter discusses, among other aspects, the relationship between the notion of integration and diversity management in Germany. The chapter starts with an analysis of the construction of citizenship and national and citizen identities and the implications of these contractions. The next section analyses how the concept of integration is utilised to undermine the overdue proposal for race equality at work. The chapter finishes in giving account to the question: Where are the highly skilled ethnic minority workers in Germany? This question is answered in particularly drawing on interview insights coming from highly skilled ethnic minority participants themselves. Hence, this section offers an ethnic minority perspective on the issue, a perspective that is predominately absent so far. Moreover, this section gives account to what Layder calls the research element of the “self”. The self thereby refers to the “self identity and individual’s social experience” (Layder 1993: 72). In conclusion, this chapter demonstrates that what we are viewing is a cooptation of the notion of integration with the purpose of setting norms of national identity, which naturalises inequities of the contemporary racial order in organisation and management of ethnic minorities. It is moreover argued that the issue of race equality at work remains uncontested and ignored in Germany. These insights have particular implications when aiming for the inclusion of ethnic minority workers through diversity management.
Chapter Eight is the most comprehensive chapter of this thesis as it provides the analysis of the field of diversity management, the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity and the agency of diversity management stakeholders in Germany. It gives particular account to the contextual, multilevel and multilayered analysis of organisational reality (Bourdieu 1994; Layder 1993). The first section of this chapter, analyses the field of diversity management in Germany, building on the context set in chapter four of this thesis. Hence, this section accounts to the macro context of diversity management in Germany. The
20 theoretical concept field stands for the widespread field of society and can be operationalised in order to explain the environment and rules; so-called “objective structures” within class struggles are taking place (Bourdieu 1990). This section analyses the pertaining social dynamics in form of power relations and displays how current power relations in the field of diversity management are maintained in order to preserve the domination of predominately female native-born German practitioners and scholars in the field. It is shown that the dominance of female native-born scholars in the field of diversity management provides a possible explanation for the fact that the gender issue dominates the scientific discourse on diversity management, as well as for the absence of an ethnic minority voice in the debate concerned with diversity management in Germany.
The second section focuses on the organisational level of analysis in drawing on case study company data. The section starts with introducing the MNC under scrutiny, including aspects such as the history of the company, as well as the global diversity management of this company. Then, the focus shifts to the subsidiary located in Germany, in describing the workforce structure and the Human Resources department of the German branch. After this, the analysis of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity is provided, showing that there is no such habitus in the German branch. This section then focuses on possible explanations for the absence of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity.
Finally, this chapter provides an examination of the agency of diversity management stakeholders in Germany, which reveals that the macro context of managing ethnic diversity not only manifests in the organisational habitus of managing diversity but also in the agency of diversity management stakeholder. Building on the context raised in Chapter Two, the tyranny of history, it is described how, the current treatment of Nazi-past renders all attempts to deal with race related issues on the side of ethnic minority and native-born German diversity management stakeholders. In conclusion, the chapter argues that utilising Bourdieu’s theoretical concepts of field, habitus, agency and symbolic
21 violence in tandem with Layder´s research map provides a useful framework for this study, since this approach enhances the understanding of how micro, meso and macro phenomena influence behaviour and social activities and how the interrelationships between these layers of activity are located in their respective historical context.
Chapter Nine, provides a general discussion of the research findings. The research questions are revisited and answered in the light of the research findings. Reflecting on field research evidence, this chapter then gives an account of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany in terms of its suitability and its limitations, if aiming for the inclusion of ethnic minority workers in Germany through diversity management. Then, I explain the original contribution of this research towards constructing a theory of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany, as well as the implications of the study in terms of academic and practitioner understanding of the diversity management field. The chapter then presents the theoretical, methodological and policy implications of the research. The thesis concludes with a reflexive evaluation of the research approach and explains the limitations of this study. Lastly areas for future research are highlighted.
22 Chapter Two
The tyranny of history
2.1 Introduction
This chapter examines the influence of national guilt associated with the history of the German Nazi-past on the management of ethnic diversity in Germany. The chapter is divided in four parts, starting with the first part that illustrates the importance of history and in particular the importance to examine the treatment of history for diversity management research. The second part discusses how the treatment of Nazi-past, namely the collective national guilt of post-Holocaust Germany has shaped the framework of diversity management in Germany in such a way that race related issues have been excluded from the diversity management agenda. According to Rensmann (2004), it is the strong identification with the German nation-state, which prevents Germans from a self-critical discourse on the country’s guilt. Attempting to achieve a better understanding of the current diversity management agenda, it is therefore necessary to examine the construction of the nation-state, national identity and citizenship.
The second part of this chapter, discusses the historical creation of the nation- state, national identity and citizenship in Germany. Using the example of citizenship creation, it is shown how citizenship regulations are utilised to preserve the power and the social status of the dominant group in Germany. The section outlines four implications for ethnic minority individuals coming from the process of citizenship creation. These implications are: that Turks have been not conferred voting rights, the legal restriction on a dual citizenship and the underrepresentation of ethnic minorities, in particular ethnic minority Turks in the civil service sector and lastly, the importance of the policy of citizenship for the construction of national and citizen identities in Germany. The forth and final section provides a conclusion of the discussed topics.
23 2.2 The importance of history for diversity management research
Diversity and equality concerns and patterns of disadvantage in the labour market are historically constructed, and they draw the framework of diversity agenda at the national, organisational and individual level (Prasad and Mills 1997; Özbilgin and Tatli 2008). Therefore, attempting to understand the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany requires the acknowledgment of the importance of history in organisational research. For instance Bourdieu (1990) argues that habitus is not a static construct, contrary this construct varies substantially by time and geographic boundaries. History can be understood as a major feature of social life, which influences behaviour and social activity in general (Layder 1993).
Consequently, history provides the context for the interrelations of micro, meso and macro layers of social phenomena (Bourdieu 1992; Layder 1993; Özbilgin 2009) and represents the temporal dimension affecting all levels and elements of inquiry. A relational multilevel perspective which considers history can enlighten and uncover hidden structures, processes, power dynamics and relations or for example on deeper level settled causal mechanism, which are not visible on the surface level (Bourdieu 1992; Layder 1993). According to Özbilgin and Tatli (2005: 856), this can be achieved by
Situating individuals within the context of the organisation and in their relations to each other, as well as by situating the organisation and organisational culture within the context of society and history…
Concerning organisational diversity management research, this contextual and multilevel approach offers new possibilities of understanding of diversity in organisations as a social-historical creation, which is accomplished in conditions of struggle and domination. For instance Özbilgin (2010: 3) argues,
Understanding equality, diversity and inclusion at work in the context of time and history permits us to see the real extent of change through transformation, backlash, atrophy and retrenchment as well as inertia in the form of resistance, conservatism and apathy. Historical analyses provide an understanding of dependencies in terms of resources, rules, and cultural and institutional arrangements, and render it possible for us to envisage more realistic trajectories of future change.
History must be viewed as one primary feature in the relationship between social factors and institutional change, as it does affect organisational field behaviours. In the case of Germany, the Nazi-past, and particularly the treatment of this past, represents a major social pressure on organisations. However, institutional theory argues that organisations become isomorphic in order to survive in the social environment (Meyer and Roman 1977; DiMaggio and Powell 1983) and in order to handle pressure from its environment.
Bolman and Deal (2003) define isomorphism as the process of organisations becoming similar to other organisations in the same organisational field. Furthermore, mimetic isomorphism refers to the process in which organisations become more alike by copying one another. In the process of isomorphism, organisations adopt “institutional rules within their own structures” with the result that “organisations become more homogeneous, more similar in structure, over time” (Scott 1992: 209). They adopt these rules as a response to pressures from audiences in the environment (DiMaggio and Powell 1983) and the stronger the pressures, the greater the isomorphism. Such kind of isomorphism can be found in the organisational context of managing ethnic diversity in Germany, were the majority of organisations are still reluctant to the idea of managing ethnic diversity (Köppel et al. 2007). Though, things can change because of macro context pressures, such as legislation or stakeholder pressure, which according to Bolman and Deal (2003) could be framed with the term coercive isomorphism. However, in Germany we can see that the past, namely the Nazi-past, dominates other macro context pressures such as for example legislation targeting race
25 equality. These insights give a clear call for the consideration of history in organisational research, particularly when it comes to changing organisations. However, while the importance of history for understanding current politics and policy is widely acknowledged in for instance political science (Green 2007) diversity management research often ignores history. According to Layder (1993: 175) some
… authors tend to overlook, or at least seriously underestimate, the importance of the distinction between the historical forces that promote specific kind of processes of social change, and the flux and dynamics that characterize everyday routine forms of behaviour and interaction.
However, overlooking history seems to be a common trait in diversity management research in Germany. Apparently, there is a startling ignorance of history, particularly of the Nazi-past. Consequently, it is important not only to examine the larger historical context, but also at how this history is treated in contemporary Germany. For instance, Özbilgin argues (2010: 3) “… it is the treatment of history, rather than the history itself that is important.” This PhD study shows that it is not enough to examine only the history of a country as something bygone in order to understand social phenomena. Foremost, it is important to investigate how history is treated in everyday life and furthermore how this treatment is reproduced constantly. Consequently, this means that in the case of Germany it is especially important to investigate how the treatment of the Nazi-past influences every day practice in terms of for example discourses regarding the agenda of managing ethnic diversity at work, national and organisational diversity management policies, as well as the agency of diversity management stakeholders. This is done in detail later in analysis chapters to come. However, this section gives only a first overview of how the treatment of the Nazi-past affects the diversity management agenda in Germany.
26 2.3 The burden of guilt and current racism in Germany
Assuming that the horrors of Nazi-Germany are a well-known part of recent history this sections starts with a very brief description of the Holocaust. After that, this section discusses national guilt as a burden of contemporary Germany and particularly its implications regarding the debate of current racism in Germany.
The Holocaust began in 1933 when Hitler came to power in Germany and ended in 1945 when the Nazis were defeated by the Allied powers. Hitler’s basic aims had been
… to achieve Lebensraum for the German race; and to rid that race of what he saw as a pollutant, a bacterium, poisoning and infecting the healthy ‘Ayran’ stock: the Jews (Fulbrook 2009: 197).
The Nazis used the so-called term the “final solution” to refer to the plan to murder the Jewish people. During the time of the Holocaust approximately six million European Jews have been killed by Nazi Germany. The horrible murdering of Jews and the war found its end when Nazis were defeated by the Allied powers. Soon after Germany was divided into two opposed polities, West Germany (FRG) and Eastern Germany (GDR) due to the post-war settlement between the West and the Soviet state.
Processing national guilt has been in the heart of the post-Holocaust democratisation in post-war Western Germany, attempting to develop a post- nationalist democratic identity (Habermas 1988; Schwan 1997). Certainly, the memory and the legacy of this past have special implications in Germany. Particular, considering the fact that Germany has to carry the burden of national guilt since after the end of the Second World War. Branscombe and Doosje (2004) define collective guilt as the unpleasant emotional reaction that results among a group of individuals when it is perceived that the group illegitimately harmed members of another group. It is often the result of sharing a social identity with others whose actions represent a threat to the positivity of that identity. Additionally,
… group-based guilt is characterised by three interrelated properties: a focus of attention on the group self, a sense of group responsibility for a immoral act, and an extremely unpleasant feeling that people prefer to assuage through restitution or avoidance (Iyer et al. 2004: 263).
Safran (2000) argues that national guilt has deeply affected the collective memory and that even now guilt plays a key role in many facets of contemporary German social and political life. Contrary, Rensmann (2004: 170) argues that it is “very questionable if there is anything like guilt that can be collectively attributed to following generations”. He argues that guilt cannot be inherited or transferred to later generations, which were not involved in the evil deeds of the Holocaust. Moreover, he argues that particularly the collective aspect can only be applied to members of Nazi Germany, which could be made responsible for the crimes of Nazi Germany. Nevertheless, he then later adds, “there is an intergenerational complex of group-related, collective guilt feelings among members who share a group identity with a negative history” (Rensmann 2004: 170). However described, certain recent studies and incidents have revealed a startling ignorance about the Nazi-past in Germany (Fulbrook 2007). An ignorance, which in my opinion leads to an obvious avoidance of issues related to current racial discrimination, which could remind the Nazi-past and consequently cause unwanted guilt feelings.
Nowadays, we can see that the historical national guilt is a subject of the public debate in Germany, contrary to shortly after the Second World War. Until recently, the memory of the Nazi-past has been largely taboo in the public debate. However, we can also see attempts to liberate German identity from the so-called burden of national guilt. Particularly, the unification set free a new nationalist euphoria (Stern 1994) leading in a recreation of German self-image as a self-
28 confident nation that was no longer imperfect because of its history and national guilt. For the first time after the Second World War, patriotism and national pride became fashionable again. For instance, leading politicians started to endorse patriotism explicitly directed against the persistent memory of German guilt (Cohen 1999). The German nation with its traumatized and damaged national identity due to the Holocaust acts, which were inconsistent with Western humanitarian values, started promoting a self-conceived ‘normal nation’ (Olick 1998). Being a ‘normal’ nation or a ’normal’ individual seams to be a strong desire in contemporary Germany. For instance, Fulbrook (1999) argues that collective guilt provokes in some a collective unease at being German, while others relatives the Holocaust and insist that Germany is a normal nation. However, Taifel and Turner (1986) argue that individuals tend to externalise recurring group-based guilt feelings because they may threaten their group identity, and thus may endanger the part of one’s self-image that is derived from group membership. One could argue that this externalisation goes beyond the externalisation of guilt feelings, in a way that everything what could remind this guilt feelings, as for example current race discrimination, gets externalised too. This externalisation of race related issues means that such issues remain ignored and unchallenged. How an issue such as for instance race equality can be promoted under such circumstances remains questionable.
2.4 What is a German? Legislating national identity, today and in the past
Coming from the point of view that nations are socially, politically and culturally constructed and moreover collectively and individually experienced and reproduced (Fulbrook 1999; Berger and Luckmann 1966; Bourdieu 1990) this section outlines the historical emergent construction of the German nation state as well as the therewith-related historical construction of national identity and citizenship. Afterwards, this section provides a discussion of how the historical construction of citizenship, and the therewith-connected definition of who is German and who not, is affecting ethnic minorities. One important matter is that ethnic minority workers are not entitled to work as civil servant without holding
29 the German citizenship. Hence, the historical construction of citizenship serves as a mechanism to preserve existent power structures, which only see native-born German workers working for the official body in Germany.
I start from the idea that there is not such a thing as a static, self-existent and self- governing nation or national identity. Nations and national identities are historical emerged constructs, which exist merely through collective and also individual reproduction (Berger and Luckmann 1966). This view is contrary to for example Durkheim’s (1982) view of nations, which he would have called a social fact, referring thereby to values, cultural norms, and social structures, which he sees as external to the individual. Durkheim made two main distinctions between social facts. The first distinction, called material social facts, refers to the physical social structures exerting influence on the individual. The second distinction, called nonmaterial social facts, refers to the values, norms and other conceptually held beliefs. While for instance Bourdieu accepts the view that structures, which we could apply to the concept of a nation or citizenship regulations, are the product of social consensus, he further argues that the consensual structuring of structures must be seen as a
… competition for domination amongst groups within society possessing different degrees of economic power. On symbolic power proposes, therefore, a synthesis whereby agents compete with each other to create new structures in terms of the inherited structures, which are isolable as transitory, free-standing entities, unsubmerged by the process of change. For Bourdieu in other words, structures have autonomous but transient life. They exist to be deployed and adapted by agents seeking to establish their position within possibilities offered to them as a result of prior social position that is their inheritance (Grenfell and James 1998: 31).
For instance, Mandel (2008: 206) argues, “contrasting attitudes about citizenship in Germany come to the fore in mechanisms of inclusion or exclusion of outsider.” In the case of Germany, we can clearly see that for example the
30 creation of citizenship policies is utilised to exclude ethnic minorities, particularly ethnic minority Turks. However, before examining this phenomenon it should be clarified what Mandel or others mean when referring to attitudes of citizenship or national identity.
Communities, which claim to be a nation, have based their claims on some substantive attributes (Fulbrook 1999). However, such attributes are often confused of being ethnic attributes (Mandel 2004: 207). For instance, Barth (1969) argues that ethnicity refers to a range of attributes that make ethnic groups distinguishable attributes drawn from different cultural areas, such as language or religion. Thereby
Every social class that is also a cultural class claims to define culture by appeal to its own standard or to contest, at least in the case of culturally dominant classes, the definition that the hegemonic culture (i.e. those who are culturally dominant) imposes (Bourdieu 2004: 5).
These cultural distinctions are also associated with economic and political differences, which can cause an overlap of ethnicity, culture and class (Banks 1996). For instance, Max Weber sees the notion of ethnic groups as identification with common descents, which can be real or imagined (Weber 1978). Moreover, the definition of ethnicity is often intentionally formulated to subsume the concept of race. Even scholars working on the issues of ethnicity and race hold opposing views on the question of whether ethnicity and race should be understood as nested or distinct concepts (Cornell and Hartmann 2002).
However, we could talk now about different cultures, religion and also language as attributes, which are partially the pillars constituting a national identity. However, I argue that in the case of Germany the construction of citizenship and also the construction of national identity derives merely from the believe that ‘German-ness’ is first of all reflected in the bloodline and therefore in a racial community. Blood functions as signifier of descent and citizenship (Brubaker
31 1992) and moreover affects thereby “the transfiguration of the linguistic construct race into its physical signs” (Linke 1999: 119). In order to understand the role of the bloodline for the current common definition of the “German-ness” it is necessary to go back to the development of the German nation-state and national identity, which gives the basis for the definition of the German citizenship.
Historically, Germany has been first unified as a nation-state during the Franco- Prussian War in 1871. The Hohenzollern dynasty of Prussia ruled the new empire, whose capital was Berlin. Despite being unified, all constituent states retained their monarchies and the power over domestic matters. Only foreign policy and war were national areas of competence (Fulbrook 2009). Furthermore, there has not been a German citizenship even after 1871. The first German citizenship has been established in 1913 as an addition to existing Land-citizenships (Reichs- und Staatsangehörigkeitsgesetz). Only in 1934, under Adolf Hitler, a unified German citizenship replaced the Land-citizenships, excluding nation-wide all individuals not belonging to the German bloodline. At the same time for instance the German state of Franconia cancelled all the citizenship for all Jews naturalized between 1922 and 1929. The citizenship right of 1934 stayed into force until the year 2000. That might be one reason that for example Fulbrook describes the construction of a national identity in post-Holocaust as a failed construction of national identity (Fulbrook 1999).
The creation of the idea to use an imaginative bloodline as an attribute constituting German-ness can thereby be understood as a desperate attempt to unify a diverse range of people not having too much in common. According to Fulbrook (1998, 1991), it is wrong to assume that there is one simple entity of the Germans. She argues that Germany has been marked by a geographical complexity and a great diversity of political forms, with a range of people speaking variants of the German language across a central Europe area, also including for most of Germany’s history non-German-speaking people. Therefore, the German understanding of nationhood has been Volk-centered and differentialist. Since national feeling developed before
32
… the nation-state, the German idea of the nation was not originally political, nor was it linked to the abstract idea of citizenship. This prepolitical German nation, this nation in search of a state, was conceived not as the bearer of universal political values, but as an organic culture, linguistic or racial community – as an irreducible particular Volksgemeinschaft. On this understanding, nationhood is an ethnocultural, not a political fact (Brubaker 1992:1).
One could think now that the idea of choosing blood as an attribute for the German citizenship is stemming from the times of Adolf Hitler. Apparently, this is not the case. The definition of the German citizenship drawing on the principle of the ius sanguinis (right of blood) evolved in the time of Emperor William II. The ius sanguinis is the opposite of the ius soli, which draws on the right of the ground as for example common in the UK and France.
The maintenance of the bloodline as an attribute for German-ness during the Third Reich is not surprising, as “the Aryan cult was based on the idea of an authentic, pure German essence reflected in bloodline” (Mandel 2004: 208). However, what does astonish is the fact that this citizenship regulation stayed in national law until the year 1999. For instance Fulbrook (1999: 180) argues
… one of the most curious, ironic legacies of the Nazi dictatorship was the retention in West Germany of an essentially ethnic, or at least blood right, definition of German and in particulate the fact that the concept of a German `race´ - however uncomfortable the explicit use of this term may be – was enshrined in the German citizenship laws of the Federal Republic.
On the subject of this paragraph, it could be argued that the concept of a German race through a bloodline is hitherto preserved in German citizenship law. Even
33 today, we can find the following paragraph of Article 116a in the German ‘Basic law’ (Grundgesetz):
A German in the sense of this constitution, unless stipulated differently by other legal regulations, is a holder of German citizenship (Staatsangehörigkeit), or a refugee or exiled person of German ethnicity (Volkszugehörigkeit), or his spouse or descendant, who was admitted to the territory of the German Reich according to its borders of December 31, 1937.
The paragraph contains the definition of German citizenship, which for instance drawing on German ethnicity (Volkszugehörigkeit) grants immediate citizenship to ethnic Germans from the former Soviet republics (Brubaker 1992; Joppke 2005). Moreover, according to Brubaker (1992: 172)
… the nation-state is not only, or primarily, an ethnodemographic phenomenon, or a set of institutional arrangements. It is also, crucially, a way of thinking about and appraising political and social membership. Because this way of thinking remains widely influential, debates about the citizenship status of immigrants remain in large part debates about nationhood.
This statement of Brubaker brings it to the point. The nation-sate is a way of thinking about appraising political and social membership. However, it goes further, since it is also about appraising political and social rights. These insights bring us to a crucial aspect of the construct of nation-state and also back to Bourdieu (1990). He argues that such structures exist merely to be deployed and adapted by agents seeking to establish their position and to preserve their existing status as well as power relations.
Georg Simmel (1950) described the immigrant as a stranger; physically present but not a member of the community. Following this paradigm, an extensive
34 scholarship emphasizes the distinctions between citizen-members on one hand and immigrant-outsiders on the other (Walzer 1983; Brubaker 1992; Honig 2001). Citizenship rules access to elemental rights in a society. Therefore, citizenship concerns a fundamental aspect of the boundary between a native ethnic majority and an immigrant minority (Liebman 1992).
Germany's sole reliance on the principle of descent, ius sanguinis, in the ascription of its citizenship at birth before 2000 has meant that second- and third- generation immigrants had no right of naturalization. It was possible to undergo a naturalisation procedure in order to acquire German citizenship. However, this procedure did not encourage many immigrants to naturalise, as for instance only 186,688 immigrants acquired German citizenship in the 1980’s (Constant et al. 2006). One negative aspect was that even the relative high monetary fee of up to 5000 DM that applicants had to pay for the application, did not give immigrants the “right” to acquire the German citizenship. The decision of whether an application was accepted and the citizenship granted was up to the judgment of individual German officials. Therefore, applicants had to expect that they could loose the high fee of up to 5000 DM, attempting to get the German citizenship. Additional requirements were 15 years of residence, ius Domicilii, which made for instance the naturalization for people under 15 impossible. Further requirements were German language proficiency, a clean police record and surrender of previous citizenship (Castles and Davidson 2000).
However, as mentioned earlier the naturalisation right changed in the year 2000. The main change is that the bloodline, ius sanguinis, is no longer the only route to citizenship; the law of soil, ius soli, is also implemented in Germany for the children of immigrants (Constant et al. 2007). Even so this can be seen as a major improvement, one major aspect of current legislation still prevents in particular ethnic minority Turks from naturalisation. The citizenship legislation in Germany does not accept dual nationality. Only citizens belonging to the European Union are excepted from this regulation.
35 This regulation affects particularly the group of ethnic minority Turks in Germany and this for different reasons. Giving up the Turkish citizenship comes along with a number of shortcomings on side of ethnic minority Turks. According to Turkish law one cannot give up the Turkish citizenship before being eighteen years old. This affects particularly second, third and meanwhile forth generation of ethnic minority Turks and means that young ethnic minority Turks are unable to naturalise before the age of eighteen. A further problem is that giving up the Turkish citizenship means automatically the loss of possible pension and inheritance entitlements, which affects first generation immigrants the most. This might explain why only around 690.000 from 2.8 million ethnic minority Turks are naturalised. The naturalisation process is made more than difficult for ethnic minority Turks. It could be argued that this does not happen by accident. The German citizenship has been withheld for ethnic minorities for many decades. Withholding the German citizenship secured that ethnic minorities could not obtain any relevant political power, as they were unable to vote for example. Moreover, ethnic minorities were kept away from the official body, as there is no access to this job sector without German citizenship. However, particular efforts are now made to keep ethnic minority Turks without political power and out of the official body. This is very interesting, considering that ethnic minority Turks are the second largest and most problematised ethnic minority group in Germany. If given for example political power, this ethnic group would suddenly hold a significant amount of power. This prospect might be threatening for native-born Germans. Making the German citizenship more accessible for ethnic minority Turks means sharing power at the same time. It would also mean that German civil service, which by now is protected through the citizenship regulation in terms of employment, would need to open up. However, the next section gives a brief account of this instance.
2.5 Civil service in Germany: a closed sector for non-German citizens
The German state covers a broad range of civil services, with the educational body as the most personnel intensive one. Even though the numbers of employees
36 in civil service decreased dramatically since the unification in Germany, the civil service sector is still a significant one. From 4.5 million employees in the civil service, 1.9 million have been officials, judges and soldiers in 2008 (Destatis 2008). Until today for instance most teachers are officials, as well as police officers or university professors. Apparently, working as an official in the civil service sector requires the German citizenship. In particular, the fact that ethnic minority workers are mostly excluded from working as a school teacher can be seen as a crucial aspect, considering the proven race discrimination in educational bodies in Germany (Gomolla and Radtke 2002; Boos-Nünning 2003). However, aiming to find the origin of this law, we have ones more to visit the Germany past.
The regulation that only German citizens are entitled to work as officials in civil service derives from the first major law to restrict the rights of Jewish citizens in Nazi-Germany. The "Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service" of April 7, 1933, according to which Jewish and "politically unreliable" civil servants and employees were to be excluded from state service, set the removal of ‘alien’ persons from civil service. The new Civil Service Law was the German authorities first formulation of the so-called Aryan Paragraph, a kind of regulation used to exclude Jews (and often by extension other "non-Aryans") from organisations, professions, and other aspects of public life (Mayer 2003).
Astonishingly, this exclusionary law is still valid, which means that for example 2.0 million ethnic minority Turks are unable to work as officials in civil service. This law is of course not the main reason for the under presence of ethnic minority workers in civil service, but yet an important one. However, as mentioned previously it is also possible to work in some civil service areas as non-official. Nonetheless, it is has been argued by ethnic minority respondents that the number of ethnic minority workers in public administration is strikingly low, making in particular mechanism of exclusion such as discrimination responsible for that. Surely discrimination can be named as one possible reason for the exclusion of ethnic minority workers in Germany’s civil service. However,
37 it could be argued that the current and historical constructed German citizenship regulations present the major obstacle so far.
2.6 Availability of terms regarding ethnic minorities and racism
The following section discusses the absence of suitable terms concerning race related issues. The vocabulary relevant to race equality is lacking in Germany, which makes it difficult to deal with racism. For instance, internationally, particularly in the Anglo-Saxon linguistic area, the term race is utilised as a political category, describing target groups of racism (Leskien 1997). Conversingly, this is not the case in Germany, where the term race is declared taboo due to the dominant position of the race concept in the national socialistic ideology. In Germany the term race is only understood and used as a biological concept, therewith displaying a different social construction (Leskien 1997). For instance, Butterwegge (1996) argues that the term race contains of a not durable differentiation of the humanity in races.
The same taboo applies to the term racism, which according to Esser (1998) accentuates the biological perspective on race. This biological perspective leads to ideological manifestations characterised by, and orientated in alleged stable biological differences between person groups, the so-called races. In this regard, the term racism should be only used in relation to ideological phenomena. This is indeed the case in Germany, where the term racism is only linked to violent racism by Neo-Nazis and is believed to overstress ‘moderate’ or ‘modern’ forms of today’s racism (Dovidio and Gaertner 1986), such as every day experiences of discrimination or racial discrimination at work. For instance, the United Nations Special Rapporteur sees the narrow understanding of racism in practice as one of the central problems in combating racism in Germany.
Due to Germany’s historical experience, racism has traditionally been equated with extremist right-wing ideology and violence. This has posed a number of practical problems, such as a tendency to predominantly
38 characterize as hate crimes those acts perpetrated by members of extreme right-wing groups, which results in many such acts being addressed solely as bodily injuries. While the challenge of eradicating such practices obviously remains relevant, the understanding of racism needs to be broadened in practice to take into account the changes that have occurred in Germany over the past half century, including the arrival of a large number of migrants of different cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds (United Nations 2010: 16).
However, such understanding of racism is not only a German fixation. Investigating the international debate surrounding the concept of racism, we can find similar arguments in for instance the US. Miles and Brown (2004) argue that the term racism should only be used in reference to ideological phenomena. Moreover, they argue that the term racism is lacking analytical value and therefore they argue that the use of the term race should be limited.
The case for limiting the use of the concept to refer ideology is based on the assumption that the analytical value of a concept is determined by its utility in describing and explaining social processes. As we demonstrated, the inflation of the concept has resulted it being used to connote a wide range of practices and processes. Not only does such concept lack discriminatory power, but it also makes the identification of determinacy more difficult (Miles and Brown 2004: 103).
Although the debate surrounding the concept of racism is ongoing, terms such as race and racism are an inherent part of international and European race equality vocabulary. One main reason is that those terms have been widely accepted in international agreements concerning race equality. One example is the UNO definition of racial discrimination from 1965, which is established in the political discourse and internationally recognized. In the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination definition, Part 1 Article I it says:
39 In this Convention, the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.
The term race is also to find in European equality legislation. For instance, both definitions of direct and indirect discrimination include the term race. In the European council directive 2000/43/EC, Article 2 paragraph 1, it says:
… direct discrimination shall be taken to occur where one person is treated less favourable than another is, has been or would be treated in a comparable situation on grounds of racial or ethnic origin;” and “indirect discrimination shall be taken to occur where an apparently neutral provision, criterion or practice would put persons of a racial ethnic origin at a particular disadvantage compared or practice is objectively justified by a legitimate aim and the means of achieving that aim are appropriate and necessary.
While it seems that above discussed terms are now widely accepted in the international and also European political debate, this is not the case in Germany. Thus far, the German government and public are neglecting terms such as race and racism and use instead terms such as ‘resentment’, ‘xenophobia’ or ‘discrimination’ (Van Dyk, 1995). A further in the 1980´s popular grown term and still commonly used is the term hatred of foreigners (Ausländerfeindlichkeit). This term is marked by an enormous lack of clarity and additionally implies that ethnic minorities are foreigners and therefore not a part of the German population, even if born in Germany. From an ethnic minority perspective it could be argued that this term has a bitter and also irritating aftertaste. The message sent by this term is that ethnic minorities, which are living for generations in Germany and are partially naturalised, are still seen as foreigners rather than as Germans.
40 Besides, this term simply does not serve the purpose it has been created for. For instance, how can this term be utilised to explain the low achievements of ethnic minority Turks in education or employment, when according to various statistics it is proven that other ethnic groups, such as Spaniards, have nearly similar educational outcomes to native-born Germans. We obviously cannot describe this phenomenon with hatred of foreigners. It is not about all so-called foreigners, and the so-called hostility is also not directed against all foreigners, it is about particular groups and therefore terms such as race or racism are more appropriate attempting to examine and also protect target groups of racism. The term hatred of foreigners summarises hatred against an actually not concretely describable person's group (Zick 1997). Moreover, Esser and Ganter (1998) argue that latent and also openly shown defence and rejection towards people does not orient itself at the civic status of the persons concerned, but mainly at rather vaguely determined social characteristics, which prove from the view of the native one as strange.
Coming back to the term foreigner itself, we are presented with a further discussable strand of terminology. Ethnic minorities have been named and renamed several times in the last decades. Besides the term foreigner, we can find several more terms attempting to describe ethnic minorities. One term is guest workers, rooted in the guest worker agreements, which started in the early fifties and ended soon after. However, the term guest worker remained in use, even fifty years after the last agreement. Additionally, the second generation of the so-called guest workers were then called guest worker children. While young ethnic minority individuals were using this term already in a humoristic way of self- description, native-born Germans insisted using this term in a serious manner until recently. With the shift in integration politics and the acceptance of being a country of immigration, initiated through the red- green coalition, terms started being replaced too.
Shortly after 2000 terms such as migrant appeared in the political and public debate. The problem with the term migrant is that it gives the idea that all ethnic
41 minorities individuals immigrated from somewhere to Germany, which is apparently not the case. Today, nearly fifty percent of ethnic minorities are already born in Germany. However, in the year 2004, driven by the new integration act, terms have been changed again. In recent years, the term migration background (Migrationshintergrund) gained ground, particularly in the political debate. As a result, most research is now using three categories, foreigners, Germans and Germans with migration background.
The last example for the lack of suitable terms concerning race related issues refers to the absence of an equivalent term for the term race equality. The term equality (Gleichstelltung) is only used in relation to gender equality, which actually rather refers to women equality than to gender equality. Considering the absence of suitable terms regarding race equality, it is not surprising that comprehensive debate regarding race equality cannot be described either. In the case of Germany politicians and the media focus on the integration of ethnic minorities, and take little interest in issues such as race equality and, or racial discrimination, particularly at work. However, it has to be described as rather difficult to address race equality without a suitable term naming in. The absence of suitable terms shows that there is a resistance regarding race related issues in Germany.
2.7 Absence of ethnic data monitoring practices
The collection of ethnic records has always been very contentious in Germany, especially considering the experience of 1939-45. Today Germany is providing one of the highest levels of data protection in Europe, driven by it’s past and by mistrust regarding the potential misuse of personal data, particularly by the state. The abandonment of the German population census in 1987 is one example for this. The first German data protection law passed by the Parliament of Hessen dates back to 1970, which led to the passing of the Federal Data Protection Act (Bundesdatenschutzgesetz) in 1977. The latest Act, the German Data Protection Act, transposing Directive 95 from 2003, limits possibilities of intrusion on
42 privacy by ensuring that personal consent is a key condition for the collection of statistics (Dix 2001).
However, the Holocaust influences not only the German approach towards ethnic data collection. For instance in the UK, there is the concern that those records could fall in wrong hands and been used against ethnic minorities, for example to identify members of minorities and thus to abuse or damage them (Johnson 2008). Hence, it is sometimes argued in terms of legitimacy that to keep ethnic records is morally wrong. It is also argued in the UK that such records are unlawfully, according to European Data Protection Directive (Directive 95/46/EC 24.10.1995) and British Data Protection Act 1998. Both laws set out rules about how personal information can be collected and processed by organisations and also both laws show a particular awareness regarding the sensitivity of ethnic data. For instance, Article 8 of the European directive states that: “Member states shall prohibit the processing of personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical believes …”
Nevertheless, in sub-sections of the EU Directive and the British Data Protection Act we can find exceptional cases, which allow under a number of strict conditions to process data about an individual’s racial or ethnic origin. It is seen as most important to ensure the rights and safety of the individual. Ethnic data can be only collected under following circumstances: having an explicit consent of the data subject; being legally required to process the data for employment purposes; needing to process the information in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject; and dealing with the administration of justice or legal proceeding. However, the fact that these exceptions have been created, despites the earlier described concerns, shows that it has been recognised in Britain and also in Europe that there is a need for ethnic data. In particular it has been demonstrated in Article 13 of the Amsterdam Treaty, that the collection of ethnic data related to employment and also service delivery is needed when aiming to meet the European equality targets and agenda. It is broadly acknowledged in the UK that policy does not always translate into practice (Kirton and Greene 2006), which
43 applies both to race equality and to diversity management policies. It is also acknowledged that in order to make race equality policies effective and to ensure that its aims are being achieved, that there is a need for ethnic monitoring. According to the British race equality commission, there is a substantial risk that without ethnic monitoring people will just see the policy as paying lip service to race equality (CRE 2005).
Likewise, in Germany the rules on using personal data for research purposes have been relaxed, due to the German Data Protection Act 2003. In theory it is now possible to collect ethnic data. Yet, in the case of Germany ethnic monitoring or ethnic data collection in general is not viewed as necessary when aiming for successful diversity and anti-discrimination polices. Criticism on the lack of ethnic data comes only from some NGOs, scientific experts and migrant lobby groups. Hence, there is no public debate on the missing statistics. Simon (2007: 56) explains, “the collection of ethnic data is still relatively limited, since initiatives in this area are few and far between” he later adds “at all events, there are few incentives for collecting data as a basis for anti-discrimination policy”.
Consequently the lack of ethnic data collection results in a lack of empirical evidence of discrimination. There is no systematic official registration of cases of discrimination and according to Bosch and Peucker (2005: 13-14), in the annual Raxen report for the EUMC, data on discrimination are highly incomplete in Germany:
Official statistical data on discrimination in the realm of employment do not exist in Germany, and even non-official data on discrimination are released rather rarely. One of those rare examples is the statistics on cases of discrimination published by the anti- discrimination office ADB Köln. The ADB Köln has registered 165 cases of discrimination between 2002 and 2004 within the framework of its counselling services. Only 7% of these 165 cases were categorised as cases of discrimination on the labour market. Research studies are another source of statistically relevant
44 information on discrimination, for instance, the ZfT Multi-Topic Survey, conducted among 1,000 representatively chosen Turks in NRW every year (since 1999). In the 6th Multi-Topic Survey (2004), 56.5% of the interviewees stated that they had experienced discriminatory treatment at their workplace – more than in any other area. Furthermore, 48.4% stated that they had faced discrimination while they were looking for a job. These results display – for the first time since 1999– a slight decrease in the perception of discrimination in employment.
Despite ongoing criticism regarding this deficient practice on side of numerous migrant lobby groups, which view such data collection as an important instrument to lighten up discriminative practices, there is no support on side of the government or particularly the Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency. Companies are in opposition to the collection of ethnic data as well. The main argument is that ethnic monitoring would lead to enormous bureaucratic and financial efforts (Miera 2008). By and large, the availability of data, which could shade light on racial discrimination, must be described as limited.
At present, the analysis of racial discrimination draws merely on two surveys: the micro census (Mikrozensus) and the Socio-Economic Panel (Sozio- oekonomisches Panel, SOEP). The micro census is a survey, which is based on a one per cent sample of the German population, carried out starting from 1957. However, until 2005 micro census data only differentiated along nationality lines, excluding therewith a considerable number of naturalised ethnic minority individuals (Haug 2005). For instance, more than one million immigrants naturalised, in the years between 1995 and 2002 (Statistisches Bundesamt 2004). Under the Immigration Act of 2004 and in order to address the problem of incomplete data regarding ethnic minorities, the micro census introduced a question asking for the parent’s country of birth in 2005, making it possible to study migrant’s descendants. The second data source the SOEP, which is a longitudinal panel, shows similar deficiencies in terms of ethnic data. In 1984, the SOEP started surveying 5,921 households (representing 12,290 persons), from
45 which 3,724 were still being observed in 2004. While an immigrant panel was added in 1994/1995, the SOEP includes no question making it possible to identify immigrant descendants. Additionally, the government created a further data source, under the Immigration Act of 2004, where aliens are recorded on a central register of aliens (Ausländerzentralregister, AZR), which is kept by the BAMF (Federal Bureau for Migration and Refugees). While this central register of aliens provides some information on foreigners, it provides none on naturalised ethnic minority individuals. Immigrants who naturalise are automatically removed from the central register of aliens (Simon 2007).
The above described lack of ethnic data and the therewith-connected lack of empirical evidence of discrimination presents a serious problem attempting to combat discrimination in Germany. The prospects of change regarding the collection of ethnic data look rather unpromising. Firstly, there is no serious public or governmental interest in the collection of ethnic data and ethnic monitoring, which is clearly displayed in the absence of a debate regarding this issue. For instance Johnson (2008: 2) argued that in the UK
Early opposition to the introduction of ethnic monitoring was a fear of what the data might show in terms of discrimination, and a belief that if we don’t measure it we can’t be doing it.
However, in the case of Germany it might be exactly the same fear, which is holding back the government from introducing a comprehensive ethnic data collection and ethnic monitoring. A fear which, considering Germany’s Nazi-past, might even go deeper than for instance in the UK, bringing us back to the tyranny of history.
A second problem is caused by the fact that official action is highly decentralised in Germany. Länder have extensive powers to conduct their own Länder policies for instance. However, in the context of ethnic data collection and ethnic monitoring this can be rather viewed as a fortunate instance. A recent
46 development, which can be viewed as a ray of hope, is a network of cities and Länder, such as Essen, Stuttgart, Duisburg and Berlin, which are jointly setting up an information system in order to collect data on integration and discrimination. What this network shows is that the collection of ethnic data is possible, as long as political will exists.
Exactly this political will is yet absent in the German federal government. Issues such as collection of ethnic data and ethnic monitoring are not considered in combating discrimination and not supported by the public so far. According to the latest Eurobarometer (2009), support for monitoring the composition of the work- force is the weakest in Austria 31 per cent and Germany 33 per cent, contrary to for instance high support in countries such as Greece 78 per cent, Cyprus, 67 per cent, and Denmark 66 per cent. Additionally, the support decreased by seven per cent in Germany, and eleven per cent in Austria compared to 2008. Therefore, bringing the issue of ethnic data collection and ethnic monitoring into the mainstream discourse would be a first step in the right direction.
2.8 Conclusion
In this chapter, I explained the tyranny of history in relation to managing ethnic diversity in Germany. The chapter started in high-lightening the importance to consider history in diversity management research. However, it is not only the history itself we should concentrate on, but also and in particular the treatment of history. It was shown that the post-holocaust collective guilt shaped the contemporary diversity management agenda in such a way that race related issues are excluded from it. These findings might explain why organisations still do not engage with race related issues and do not see managing ethnic diversity as relevant. For instance, the discrimination topic is marked by a collective silence, which effects clearly the adoption of the diversity management concept in Germany. It has been then argued that in order to achieve social change it is necessary to break the existent taboo regarding race related issues. This would mean for example that the race discrimination topic has to be discussed,
47 attempting to include ethnic minority workers through organisational diversity management approaches. A good starting point would be to finally provide more comprehensive data on racial discrimination.
Furthermore, I demonstrated that it is necessary to move beyond approaches and discourses, which merely incorporate marginalised groups into practices and also discourses, devised to suit the interests of dominant groups. This would firstly mean that race related issues need to be brought into the mainstream discourse. Therefore, it is important to finally break the existent taboo regarding race related issues. The current state of rendering ethnic minority voice in utilising a taboo has to stop. This would finally enable ethnic minorities to address and vocalise their own issues and rights in a society. Apparently, the current treatment of the German Nazi-past renders all attempts to deal with race related issues on the side of ethnic minority diversity management stakeholders. Therefore, I continue arguing that while history itself cannot be changed, the treatment of history can be changed, as it only exists because of its every day reproduction of individuals.
Acknowledging that a strong national identity fosters that people tend to taboo expressions of national guilt, which can harm conventional national identity narratives, I then examined the historical creation of the German nation-state, national identity and citizenship policies. It became clear that the current definition of the German national identity and current citizenship policies do not comply with current realities regarding the consistence of Germany’s population. Therefore, I argue that first of all Germany’s national identity needs to transform in response to its actual population. For instance Bourdieu (2004: xiv) argues
the immigrant obliges us to rethink completely the question of the legitimate foundation of citizenship and of relations between citizen and state, nation or nationality. Being absent both from his place of origin and his place of arrival, he forces us to rethink not only the instinctive rejection which, because it regards the state as an expression of the nation, justifies itself by claiming to base citizenship on a linguistic and cultural
48 community (if not racial community), but also the false assimilationist ‘generosity’ which, convinced that the state, armed with education, can produce the nation, may conceal a chauvinism of the universal.
German society, to be precise its native-born German population and politicians, denied for far too long that it is an immigration country. Today Germany consists of a diverse ethnic population. Accepting that Germany consists of a diverse population and the fact that Germany is an immigration country needs to happen urgently. According to Fulbrook (1999) the process of transforming a national identity in response to national guilt can be expected to be particularly difficult in political cultures like Germany in which affective bonds toward collective national identity are particularly strong. Yes, it might be a difficult task to transform Germany’s national identity, in particularl considering the burden of national guilt. However, I argue that a critical self-reflecting discourse in relation to how the treatment of collective guilt influences current debates on, and the engagement with race related issues is needed. Such self-critical discourse could present a first step regarding the development of a new national identity, which includes all members of the German population and not only native-born German ones. It could also open up a new ways of discourse, which does not refer to ‘ we and them’, but rather sees ethnic minorities as a part of the nation and not as outsiders.
Moreover, the transformation of Germany’s national identity would offer new ways and opportunities for ethnic minorities to finally indentify with a nation they are mostly born in. In particular changes in citizenship policies, for example granting the permission for dual citizenship, would stop treating citizens unequally regarding their ethic background.
49 Chapter Three
Integration as a dominant discourse of managing ethnic diversity
3.1 Introduction
It is reported that the notion of integration is the dominant concept in the management of ethnic diversity in Germany. Considering research question three, which is set out to give an understanding of the relation between the notion of integration and diversity management in Germany, this chapter gives an account to the concept of integration in Germany.
Until recently Germany’s majority population had difficulties coming into terms with the reality that it became an immigration country, starting with the guest worker recruitment in post-war Germany in the 1960s. Lately the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel told a gathering of younger members of her conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party that at "the beginning of the 60s our country called the foreign workers to come to Germany and now they live in our country." She added then: "We kidded ourselves a while, we said: 'They won't stay, sometime they will be gone', but this isn't reality" (BBC New Europe 2010a). Apparently, what Mrs Merkel calls a “while” stands for nearly fifty years of denial, leading to the prevail of the idea of the immigrants as in transit for a long time, which was then also reflected in a long-standing policy on guest workers. Along with this, German migration studies have been and are still dominated by an assimilative notion of integration (Geißler and Pöttker 2005: 18). Consequently, the idea of cultural diversity and the promotion of multiculturalism and race equality have been overlooked. Assimilating ethnic minorities and ‘restoring’ the mono-cultural society is in the centre of the study of integration and migration in Germany.
Considering these insights it is more than surprising that Mrs Angela Merkel argued recently (in the same speech mentioned above): “ … the approach [to
50 build] a multicultural [society] and to live side-by-side and to enjoy each other... has failed, utterly failed" (BBC 2010b). It is surprising since contrary to for instance countries such as the Netherlands (see Vasta 2006) or the UK (see Rex 2000; Parekh 2000), the German government never declared a multicultural society. Then again, in Germany the aim has always been to assimilate ethnic minorities into the dominant culture.
There is a recent political and public consensus that the integration of ethnic minorities has failed in Germany. In other words, the endeavour to assimilate ethnic minorities into German society has failed. This is particularly said for ethnic minority Turks and Muslims in general, who are viewed to be exceptionally difficult to integrate and unwilling to integrate themselves. Moreover, ethnic minorities and here again particularly ethnic minority Turks, are made solely responsible for their alleged “failure” of building the human capital needed for success in the labour market (Berlin Institut für Bevölkerung und Entwicklung 2009). Considering these insights, it could be argued that the notion of integration dominant in Germany is not as neutral as it seams at the first sight. These insights show that the notion of integration in Germany comes along with some type of racial bias, which is examined in the course of this chapter.
This chapter starts with a brief description of post-war immigration to Germany. In the next this chapter focuses on ethnic minority Turks, since this ethnic minority group is the most problematised ethnic group in Germany, which besides also explains why this study focuses to a large part on ethnic minority Turks. After this, this chapter illustrates the employment profile of immigrants, in order to understand the employment status of ethnic minority workers in Germany. The chapter then examines racial discrimination in employment in Germany, as well as questioning Germany’s anti-discrimination culture. Following this, the chapter takes a turn in focussing on the notion of integration in Germany; particularly examining the instance that integration is the dominant concept in the management of ethnic diversity in Germany. This is done by firstly paying attention to international as well as German theory of integration. Finally this
51 chapter discusses the ethnocentric discourse and policies on integration and the racist undertones of the notion of integration in Germany. The conclusion then provides a final discussion of the issues, which were described above.
3.2 Post-war migrants in Germany
German history of immigration can be viewed as a specific case, regarding factors such as geography and post-war partition. The factor geography refers to the fact that due to the Second World War people of German descent were scattered far beyond the borders of the modern German state, as for instance in countries such as Poland, Hungary or the former Soviet Union. This plays a significant role considering that Germany received until recently a large number of repatriates, claiming the German citizenship based on the “right of blood”. Moreover, due to the post-war settlement between the West and the Soviet state Germany has been divided into two opposed polities, West Germany (FRG) and Eastern Germany (GDR). The post-war partition resulted into massive refugee inflows from Eastern to Western Germany, leading to the fact that in 1950, thirty per cent of FRG residents were former refugees from mainly Eastern Germany. The arrival of these immigrants was welcomed, since post-war Germany, like other northern and western European countries, was facing labour shortages due to rapidly growing economy and industry at that time. This stream of immigration stopped in 1961 with the erection of the Berlin Wall and therewith the welcome supply of workers into German economy (Hansen 2003).
Conversely, there was still an enormous demand for workers due to the so-called West German economic miracle (Wirtschaftswunder), particularly after being cut off from immigrants coming from Eastern Germany. Furthermore, Germany contrary to for example France and the UK had no colonial regions securing a constant supply of labour. Even before this stream of Eastern German worker stopped, Germany started recruiting so-called guest workers (Gastarbeiter) in order to meet the labour demand. However, before continuing with the history of post-war immigration in Germany, it is necessary to pay attention to the term
52 Gastarbeiter, particularly regarding the implications of the term Gastarbeiter. While other countries used for example terms such as foreign labour in the UK or travailleurs etrangers in France, Germany could not use the term foreign labour because of possible negative associations with the violent deportation of human beings in the Second World War (Schrettenbrunner 1982). Therefore, the term guest worker seemed to be a more appropriate term in this context. Moreover, the term guest worker reflects the approach towards rotation of recruited workers, the so-called rotation principle, which would not allow them to settle down on permanent basis in Germany (Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, 1984).
The first guest worker agreement with the Italian government in 1955 can be seen as the starting point of an active guest worker recruitment policy in Germany. This agreement was then followed by further agreements with Spain and Greece in 1960, with Turkey in 1961, with Morocco 1963, with Tunisia in 1965 and ended with a final agreement with former Yugoslavia in 1968 (Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, 1984). During this time, the total number of guest worker increased steadily, in spite of the planned rotation of recruited workers. Clearly, the aimed rotation principle had failed and as a result the numbers of guest worker increased from 79.697 to 2.595.000 in the years between 1955 and 1973 (Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, 1984: 6). Only in 1973, due to the economic oil crisis of the 1970s, policies were enacted that essentially closed down legal immigration. The so-called recruitment stop (Anwerbestopp) underlined the intention to stop the uninhibited immigration of guest workers, which started to be perceived as a problem by the general public. At the same time, the German government expected that guest workers would return to their home countries.
However, since guest workers had no guarantee of free return, most of them stayed put in Germany. Facing the first post-war immigration restrictions in Germany, guest workers were unintentionally forced to settle down in Germany. Consequently, only 730.949 guest workers left Germany between 1973 and 1978. Only one year later in 1979, the numbers of guest workers increased again. New
53 employment of guest workers and particularly the family reunification of guest workers, which was unrestricted by the German government at that time, let the numbers of immigrants rise once more. In fact, in addition to the 2.6 Million guest workers, 1.8 Million family members immigrated to Germany (Meier-Braun 2002). Especially the fact that now family members were immigrating to Germany was a clear sign that guest worker individuals had decided about where their permanent residence would be (Schrader and Griese 1976). The overall result was that a huge number of the former guest workers, which were by and large unskilled blue-collar workers who were only expected to alleviate Germany’s labour shortages in the times of economic upturn, settled down in Germany. Hence, this group of people were unintentionally transformed from former guest workers into immigrants (Meier-Braun 2002).
In addition to the immigration of guest workers, Germany received then three further massive immigration inflows from the early 1980s until 2001. The first immigration flow consisted of two distinctive groups of ethnic Germans. The first group the so-called Übersiedler consisted of Eastern German immigrants coming to West Germany even after the Berlin Wall was build. The second and today’s largest group of immigrants, the so-called Aussiedler started immigrating to Western Germany after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989. These immigrants came in large numbers from former communist states, such as Poland, Hungary and the USSR. The third group consisted of a huge number of humanitarian refugees. However, while the group of ‘ethnic Germans’ the Übersiedler and Aussiedler were given the full right of citizenship upon arrival, on reasons of the “right of blood”, the civil status of guest workers and their families remained uncertain. Lastly, the Asylum seekers had the least claim on rights. One remark needs to be done regarding the exact numbers of immigration inflows by different groups. It is difficult to provide figures for Germany, since for instance Übersiedler and Aussiedler were not defined as immigrants because of their status as ethnic Germans (see Stalker 2002).
54 Contemporary German migration policy is mainly designed in order to attract skilled migrants, very similar to countries such as the USA, the UK, Canada and Australia. Contrary to the times of guest worker recruitment were highly skilled workers were not in the focus of recruitment schemes. However, while countries such as Canada and Australia grant qualified migrants permanent residence, coupled with the comprehensive set of rights immediately upon arrival (Richardson and Lester 2004), Germany in contrast does not confess such rights. For instance, the German Green Card program designed to attract IT workers from abroad, offered a five-year work permit without a clear path to permanent residency status. Additionally, spouses of Green Card recipients were not granted permission to work in Germany. As a result, the German Green Card program attracted significantly less than the 20,000 visas offered (Kolb 2005).
Today, more then 50 years after the first guest worker agreement, Germany again faces increasing labour shortages and an insecure welfare state (Esping-Andersen 2001), due to demographic change through an ageing society (Healy and Schwarz-Woelzl 2007; European Commission 2007). But contrary to the post-war era, immigrant labour appears not to be the solution to the problem of labour shortages. Strikingly, immigration to Germany declined by eleven per cent in the years between 2005 and 2006. Contrary to other OECD countries, were the immigration increased by five per cent (OECD 2007). Attempts to attract highly skilled labour remain unsuccessful. In order to create the needed human resources conditions for the future, pressured by forthcoming labour force shortage due demographic change, the German government recently changed its discourse related to ethnic minorities. The German public and political debate is now focusing on the need to deal constructively with its diverse population, particularly in terms of ethnicity.
However, through these different immigration movements from a wide range of countries, Germany has been unintentionally an immigration country for a long time. According to Liebig (2007: 8) “… Germany has received, after the United States, the largest inflows of immigrants in the OECD area over the past 15
55 years”, adding to the fact that today 20 per cent of the German population consists of ethnic minority individuals. The long overdue change in discourse regarding the German ethnic minority population can be understood as a first move into the right direction, accepting the fact of Germany as an immigration country.
3.2.1 Turks in Germany
This section focuses on the group of ethnic minority Turks in Germany. Ethnic minority Turks are perceived as the most problematic ethnic minority group in Germany. This materialised also during the field study carried out for this thesis. Considering this, it becomes necessary to give a brief description of the group of ethnic minority Turks in Germany. People of Turkish ethnicity represent with 2.8 million people (3,4 per cent of the population) the second largest ethnic minority group in Germany. Half of the people of Turkish ethnicity are born in Germany (Statistisches Bundesamt 2005). Although people of Turkish ethnicity are factually not the largest ethnic minority group, they appear to be the most problematised. In particular, an endless stream of references is made to their unwillingness to integrate into the German society (see for example Neumeyer, 2009), even though the homogeneity and cohesion of German society remains unquestioned.
According to a recent study, by the Berlin Institute für Bevölkerung und Entwicklung (2009), concerned with the state of integration of ethnic minorities in Germany, people of Turkish ethnicity are showing the lowest tendency to assimilate, are the least integrated ethnic minority group in Germany. Supposedly and they also prefer to isolate themselves to their “own” community. The reasons for that are seen in weaknesses of the immigrants such as an insufficient educational performance and qualifications, weakly developed language skills of the local language, poorly educated parents and cultural and ethnic differences. Many western European countries including Germany generally name very similar reasons attempting to explain why post-war labour migrants have been
56 over-represented in unemployment, in unskilled, lowly paid, insecure and in general undesirable work over a long time now (Wrench, 2001).
But what exactly leads to this conclusion? The report, drawing on data from the latest German micro census in 2005 shows that people of Turkish ethnicity are marked by the lowest educational outcomes compared to all other ethnic minority groups. For example, more then thirty per cent are without any educational attainment and eight per cent leave school without secondary school qualifications. Moreover, only fourteen per cent achieve school qualifications to enter university and the unemployment rate of young people of Turkish ethnicity is considerably higher than among all other ethnic minority groups. Only regarding one aspect the authors recognised a “positive” integration outcome: “People of Turkish origin achieve their best integration result in their dependence on state benefits” which stands at twice the dependence that native-born Germans report (Berlin Institut für Bevölkerung und Entwicklung 2009: 37).
Doubtless, these results are alarming, but they could have been interpreted also differently. It could be argued that this problem has two sides, one of which tends to be neglected by the dominant perspective on the issue of integration, which assumes that there is a monolithic culture and identity that a minority ethnic group should integrate into. This perspective is predicated on ethnocentric views and false assumptions of ethnic homogeneity and superiority. In particular, there is little recognition that Turks predominantly occupy working classes in Germany. Thus far, most academic works on Turks would use middle class German life as a comparator to judge educational and occupational (under)- achievement of Turks. Moreover, it remains sorely understated, that race discrimination, which was also ignored by the Berlin Institute report, plays a major role in failure regarding earlier raised problems, starting with educational institutions (Liebig, 2007).
However, I argue that the way of how this micro census data has been interpreted gives us an idea of the extent to which symbolic violence is manifested in the
57 internalised assumptions of the majority group. How this habitus manifests and of what it contains will be examined in the analysis section titled symbolic violence against ethnic minority Turks.
3.2.2 The employment profile of immigrants in Germany
Before starting this section it is relevant to mention that almost no research has targeted the question of so-called second-, or third-generation migrants labour market performance in Germany. As a result there is no sufficient data available comparing their labour market participation to the situation of their parents generation nor to natives of the same age, nor the potential consequences of different policies regarding the participation of second- generation migrants in labour market are known (Fertig and Schmidt 2001). Taking this gap in the literature into account, this section examines the labour market situation of ethnic minority workers in Germany.
The labour market situation of immigrants in Western Germany was nearly similar to that of native-born Germany, until the early 1990s. Strikingly, only female employment was different. The employment rate of female immigrants, particularly of ethnic minority Turks, was significantly higher compared to native- born German women for many years. This changed dramatically due to the recession of the early 1990s. While the employment rate of Germans declined by three percent, the employment rate of ethnic minorities dropped by about ten percent at the same time. Particularly affected by the decline in employment levels were ethnic minority Turks. This changed for a short time in the years between 1997-2001 through the economic upswing. However, this lasted only for a short time, and currently the employment rates are similar to the year 1997 (Liebig, 2007: 19).
However, not only the employment rates of ethnic minority and native-born German workers differ. A further difference can be found when examining the types of employment. For instance, ethnic minority individuals are 52.7 percent
58 workers, compared to only 28.9 percent of the native-born German population. Moreover, no more than 36.3 percent of ethnic minority individuals work as white-collar worker, contrary to 52,9 percent native-born white-collar workers. Only the self-employment rates are nearly similar. In the year 2003 the self- employment rate of immigrants was with 9.6 percent nearly the same to that of native-born Germans with 10.4 percent. Besides, attention must be paid regarding significant differences between different ethnic origins, as not all ethnic groups show the same results. While for instance 45.8 percent of ethnic minority Spaniards are white-collar workers, which is close to the number of native-born German white-collar workers, only 22.4 percent of ethnic minority Turks and 30.3 percent of former Yugoslavs are white-collar workers. Hence, ethnic minority Turks are with 71 percent and former Yugoslavs with 60.1 percent predominantly workers. The proportion of white-collar workers for Greek, Moroccan, Italian and Portuguese immigrants were under the average of all employed foreigners (Bericht der Beauftragten der Bundesregierung 2005). Thus, the majority of employed ethnic minority workers works primarily in the industrial sector as unskilled or trained workers.
The earnings of immigrant employees have to be seen in relation to the types of employment and job levels of ethnic minority workers. In accordance to the poor employment situation of ethnic minorities, earnings must be described as poor too. Immigrants from former Yugoslavia and repatriates receive the lowest incomes. Contrary, immigrants from southwest Europe are to find less frequently in the low income range then native- born Germans. However, eight percent of native-born Germans earn twice the average national income, a portion, which is reached by none of the ethnic minority groups. This indicates that ethnic minority workers only rarely hold higher positions in the labour market (Statistisches Bundesamt 2007).
In the case of Germany it is mostly argued that the poor employment situation of ethnic minority workers is reasoned in the huge number of predominantly lowly qualified ethnic minority workers, which immigrated to Germany due to the guest
59 worker recruitment policies of the past. The focus of guest worker recruitment was essentially on low-skilled labour, educational credentials were not of interest and in addition to that the migrants were mainly recruited from rural regions of their home countries. The recruited workers mainly worked in the industrial mass production, in the heavy industry and in mining and in general they reached mostly only the lower positions (Bericht der unabhängigen Kommission Zuwanderung 2001).
Nowadays, it is argued that this low skilled labour does not meet Germany’s present economic structure and demands, which both changed in recent years dramatically. Certainly, ethnic minority workers are less skilled, in particular the proportion of ethnic minority individuals without any professional education is much higher then of native-born Germans (Bericht der Beauftragten der Bundesregierung, 2005). In international comparison, the gap in educational attainment between ethnic minority individuals and native-born Germans is particularly evident in Germany (Liebig, 2007). However, it could be argued that it is not only the insufficient skill structure of ethnic minority, which constitutes the differences in the employment situation between ethnic minority and native- born German workers. For instance, ethnic minority Turks are the biggest group of self-employed businesses in Germany. Pécoud argues that this can
… at least partly be interpreted as an outcome of German-Turks’ difficult situation in the labour market. In 1998, 22.7 per cent of them were unemployed, while the percentage for German workers was at 10.5 per cent. German-Turkish workers suffer both from their lack of qualifications and from several forms of discrimination (Pécoud 2003: 248-249).
Certainly, discrimination seems to have an impact on the employment attainment of ethnic minority workers. Therefore, the following section discusses racial discrimination in the German labour market.
60 3.3 Racial discrimination in employment in Germany
Although there is no systematic collection of data regarding racial discrimination in employment in Germany, enough information has been gathered in the recent past particularly by international organisations and institutions that leave no room for doubt that racial discrimination in employment and elsewhere continues to create barriers for ethnic minorities in the employment sector and other social areas. Racial discrimination is an enormous social problem in Germany. For instance:
Whereas the number of foreigners seeking work has considerably increased, actual access to the labour market and to employment has severely deteriorated for foreigners over the last fifteen years. The employment rate of foreigners has decreased dramatically (Hönekopp et al. 2002: 4).
Moreover, following the OECD-study “Job market integration of immigrants”, in international comparison Germany has huge gaps, in particular with the integration of female immigrants into the job market. Additionally immigrants with a university graduation are up to four times more likely to be unemployed then native-born German with a university graduation (Steinhardt, 2006).
In Germany, the low job market integration of ethnic minorities and immigrants is predominantly explained with a lack of qualifications and language deficits on side of these persons. Apparently, there are such ethnic minority workers, which do not hold sufficient qualifications. But why is that so? Although, it remains sorely understated, race discrimination plays a major role in failure regarding earlier raised problems, starting with educational institutions. For example, in international comparison, the gap in educational attainment between immigrants and natives is intensely evident in Germany (Liebig, 2007). This outcome can also be attributed to racism in education. Several studies name institutional discrimination as one reason for the ‘educational failure’ of ethnic minorities and in particular Turks (Gomolla and Radtke 2002; Boos-Nünning 2003; Haas and
61 Damelang 2007). Furthermore, the dominant discourse ignores the existence of highly skilled ethnic minority members, people, who constitute a sizeable population (Müller 2005). This is astonishing, considering that education is seen as a key to successful integration of ethnic minorities.
Certainly the argument of lacking qualifications and language deficits does not apply to highly qualified ethnic minority and immigrant workers. In the case of Germany, education alone does not guarantee successful integration. For instance, highly skilled ethnic minority workers are more likely to be unemployed than native-born Germans (Steinhardt 2006). The unemployment rate among ethnic minority academics was 12,5 percent in 2005 compared to 4,4 percent among the native born academics (OECD 2007). Discrimination, stereotypes, prejudices and negative attitudes are some reasons among others, which prevent members of ethnic minorities from fully participating in the labour market (European Commission 2007). The potential of ethnic minorities remains unused and the ethnic minority working population in Germany is marginalised (Ortlieb and Sieben2008).
Furthermore, it seems that ethnic minority workers of Turkish ethnicity are particularly affected by this labour market inequality. The research team Gestring, Janßen and Polat conducted in 2006 an empirical study concerned with the barriers that second-generation ethnic minority Turks face in the labour market in Germany. Interviews with gatekeepers were carried out, within the scope of the study. One relevant finding is that the hiring decisions of gatekeepers are not only influenced by significant aspects important for a hiring process, such as educational credentials and qualifications or work experiences of the applicants. In point of fact, the study revealed that hiring decisions of gatekeepers are also influenced by certain cultural stereotypes, prejudices and partly xenophobic hostility towards ethnic minority Turks (Gestring et al. 2006). For instance, negative characteristics and attitudes such as that ethnic minority Turks are not reliable, have lower work ethics and are not interested in further training were often attributed to applicants of Turkish ethnicity. In particular male ethnic
62 minority Turks were problematised by the interviewed gatekeepers as being unable of working in teams or of working as a salesperson due to their macho attitudes or their lack of “professional humbleness” (ibid: 164). That does not mean that the situation for female ethnic minority Turks is any better. Strikingly, the largest part of the interviewed gatekeepers openly refused to hire Turkish women wearing a headscarf or expressed at least their scepticism towards employees with headscarves.
Another study by Goldberg et al. (1996) examined discrimination at the entrance to the labour market. The study showed that nineteen percent of Turkish applicants are subject to discrimination when applying for a job. In some sectors the discrimination rate was even substantially higher, like in the bank-sector with over fifty percent and in the service-sector by approximately forty percent. The data refers to an important factor of structural discrimination from ethnic minorities in the labour market.
Although it seems that ethnic minority Turks are particularly affected by labour market inequality, the same applies for most of ethnic groups other than native- born Germans. A further representative investigation about the “Situation of foreign employees and their families in the Federal Republic of Germany” (Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales 2001) revealed that thirty per cent of the interviewed persons have been disadvantaged at least once in terms of access to the job market and vocational ascent in the period of the last twelve months due to their ethnical origin. Moreover, the study indicated high values particular for younger persons.
Considering these insights, it is not surprising that a recent study, concerning “Turkish academic elites in Germany”, revealed that forty-two percent of their participants are willing to leave Germany, indicating that they “don’t feel at home” in Germany. Thereby the second-most frequented reason to leave Germany was “professional reasons” (Futureorg 2009). Unfortunately this possible loss of highly skilled labour is economically detrimental, considering the recent shortages
63 of highly skilled labour in Germany. However, this is also indicative of the racism that would rather see the minorities from undesirable ethnicities leave, when the government tries to bring in highly skilled workers from abroad through green- card schemes. Green-card schemes with their focus on temporary migration, which brings us back the outdated notion of guest worker to the German labour market.
3.4 Is there an anti-discrimination culture in Germany?
Germany’s anti-discrimination culture has been criticised of being weak and under-developed many times, particularly on side of trade unions and NGOs (DGB 2006). Conversely, the German political and public debate concerned with ethnic minority issues does not include issues such as racial discrimination and anti-discrimination so far. The majority group largely silences such issues. Contrary to other European countries, such as France or the UK, were a broad public debate on ethnic discrimination has been taking place for a long time. There is a consensus in German politics and German society that the disadvantaged position of ethnic minorities is caused by a lack of qualification, such as low educational credentials and, or weak German language skills. However, discrimination is not seen as connected to this obvious disadvantage. Consequently, anti-discrimination provisions are not seen as a potential solution to the so-called integration problems of migrants and ethnic minorities. Some explain this phenomenon with a lack of awareness regarding the extent and impact of racial discrimination on side of the German society (Peucker 2006). According to the Eurobarometer respondents in Germany, all the forms of discrimination, on which they were polled in the latest survey, seem to be less widespread in their country than in the rest of the European Union. Nonetheless, 54 per cent of the German public perceived discrimination on the grounds of race and ethnicity as widespread in Germany (Eurobarometer 2009). In this regard the argument of a lack of awareness can only be partially viewed as applicable to the German public, as more than half of the public shows awareness regarding discrimination on the basis of race.
64 It could be argued that the lack of awareness argument does not apply to the German government as there is a plethora of for instance European Union reports available, showing that race discrimination and inequality a major problem in Germany. More likely, it is a sign of resistance of tackling race related issues, rather than a lack of awareness regarding race discrimination and inequality. The heated political debates concerning the implementation of the two EU Equality Directives 2000/43/EC and 2000/78/EC into national legislation illustrates this weak culture of anti-discrimination clearly. Particularly trade and employers associations and churches opposed to the new protection against discrimination. The controversial discussion regarding the implementation of the European race directive lasted for nearly six years. This discussion together with the several unsuccessful parliamentary attempts of implementing the Discrimination Act led then to a, according to European Union requirements, too late implementation of the European directives in 2006 (Merx and Vassilopoulou 2007).
However, previous to the implementation of the European directives Germany had signed up to international human rights agreements many years ago. Relevant in this context are the UN Conventions: ICERD (the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination, from 1966) and CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Woman, from 1979). Germany has been obliged to exercise a non-discrimination policy according to its membership in the United Nations, since Article 1 of the UN Charter demands the respect for human rights without any difference as to race, religion, sex or language. Furthermore, Article 3 in the German Basic law (Grundgesetz) from 1949, determined that governmental discrimination on the grounds of race, language and origin, religious belief, religious and political views or disability is not permitted (Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung 2008: 84). In contrast, there was no extensive legal protection against discrimination in the private sector, until the implementation of the German Anti-discrimination law 2006. In Civil law, in specific §611a Bürgerliche Gesetzbuch (BGB = Civil Code), there are regulations banning all forms of sex discrimination in employment. Astonishing only 119 claims came to courts in 25 years based on §
65 611a. In this light §611a remained a relatively untapped law (Merx and Vassilopoulou 2007). The law was particularly ineffective due to its very abstract regulation.
Moreover, the law included no regulations against discrimination on the basis of ethnicity (Will and Rühl 2004), despite the fact that racial discrimination has been noticeable in different areas of life for a long time (Meyer 2003). As a result, victims of racial discrimination were not able to start a legal procedure against their unfavourable treatment. Before the introduction of the General Equal Treatment Act, all these anti-discrimination provisions together did not provide a sufficient legal framework for the protection against ethnic discrimination. Therefore, it is not surprising that there is also no information available regarding court cases of race discrimination before the implementation of the European race directive.
No statistics on or systematic collections of legal procedures regarding racial or ethnic discrimination are (publicly) available in Germany. Generally speaking, the number of court cases, which deal with ethnic discrimination is very low due to the lack of clear antidiscrimination provisions in the German law. However, there are official figures on the number of preliminary proceedings related to supposedly extreme right wing and/or xenophobic offences (Peucker and Bosch 2007: 49).
As a matter of fact, race related issues became then only more significant in political debates due to the European Treaty of Amsterdam from October 2, 1997. The Treaty, which sets out the principles and objectives of the European Union, affirms that:
The Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms … principles, which are common to the Member States. It emphasises the fundamental importance of non- discrimination and extends this principle to other areas in addition to
66 nationality and equal pay for men and women, which were dealt with before. In particular, it gave the European Union powers to take action against discrimination on a range of grounds (Stop-discrimination 2007).
Two European directives 2000/43/EC, the directive on equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, and 2000/78/EC, the framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, are based upon Article 13, which approved as part of the Amsterdam Treaty, provided the European Union with a legal basis to take action to combat discrimination on grounds of racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation. Germany, as a member of the European Union, was obliged to implement these two directives into German national law. This was put into practice through the new equal treatment law (Allgemeine Gleichbehandlungsgesetz, AGG). Germany, as mentioned above, implemented the directives as one of the last two European countries in August 2006.
In contrast to article 3 in the German Basic law, which is the constitution of Germany (Grundgesetz), the new AGG takes now the private sector into consideration. The important difference is that article 3 of the German basic law only protects against governmental discrimination. Discrimination through private persons or in employment was not included in this law. For instance, victims of discrimination had no rights to proceed against civil persons in the field of employment until the implementation of the German Equal Treatment Law.
Although it had been hoped, for example by trade unions and NGOs that the new legislation has the potential to contribute to a clear improvement of anti- discrimination approaches in Germany, the significant lack of specific anti- discrimination provisions seems not to have been overcome since. For instance, the government only set up an ‘independently’ operating ministerial service under the authority of the Ministry of Family Affairs (Antidiskriminierungsstelle des Bundes), instead of an independent Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency, as required in the General Equal Treatment Act.
67 The main mandate of the Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency is to receive complaints from any person who believes he or she has been discriminated against on the grounds provided in the General Equal Treatment Act. The Agency is then mandated to “give independent assistance” to such persons, in particular by (a) providing information on claims and possible legal action; (b) arranging for advice to be provided by another authority; and (c) endeavouring to achieve an out-of-court settlement. The Agency therefore does not work as a quasi-legal complaint mechanism, as it is not empowered to bring about formal discrimination complaints against persons or institutions thought to have engaged in discriminatory behaviour. Contrary to similar bodies in other European countries, the Agency has more of an information and counselling mandate than one of providing legal support (United Nations 2010: 7).
As the agency sees its mandate predominantly in the provision of information, one could assume that the German public should be informed about their de facto rights in case of discrimination. However, the contrary is the case. According to the latest Eurobarometer, only twenty-six per cent of the German public know their rights in case they are victims of discrimination (Eurobarometer 2009). It could be argued that the mandate on information seems not to be taken too seriously. For instance the absence of translated versions of the Equal Treatment Act, besides a version in English, can be viewed as one indicator. In this regard it is not surprising that the agency has dealt only with a limited number of cases of discrimination based on race or ethnicity so far. From August 2006 to December 2008, only as little as 14.5 per cent of cases involved discrimination on grounds of race or ethnicity and 2.8 per cent on grounds of religion or belief. Thereby, a large number of these cases are concerned to mobbing at the workplace, discrimination in access to nightclubs and discrimination in the rental housing market (United Nations 2010).
Generally, the agency is criticised of having a weak mandate by civil society organisations. Foremost, the agency is criticised of not being proactive in fulfilling its role. For instance, the agency is not carrying out in-depth research on
68 racism; neither does the agency collect data to assess discrimination in employment. This might be partially explainable with the lack of human and financial recourses available to the agency. For instance, the agency does only employ the inadequate number of around 20 full-time employees. A further point of criticism relates to the lack of regional or local structures, including field offices. This is viewed as particular problematic for the victims of discrimination in relying on the Agency. Lastly, the independency of the agency is questioned by many organisations. For instance, the head of the agency is appointed by a ministry, which might make the agency being overly responsive to the majority in parliament (United Nations 2010). Moreover, there is no data available regarding the impact of the Equal Treatment Act on combating race discrimination in employment in the private sector. On the contrary, the first research carried out by the agency examined the costs for fulfilling the requirements of the Equal Treatment Act for the private sector. Showing therewith clearly whose advocate the agency has chosen to be.
Considering the insights mentioned above, one could argue that Germany’s anti- discrimination culture is still extremely weak, even after the implementation of the European directives. However, strikingly the majority of the respondents polled in Germany for the Eurobarometer on discrimination consider that enough is being done in their country to combat all forms of discrimination, with scores higher than the average at European level. Additionally German survey participants believe stronger than the rest of the European Union that progress has been achieved in this area (Eurobarometer 2009). It could be argued that this belief results from the public being under informed. It is in particular not surprising considering that there is no data concerning race discrimination available and that race related issues are silenced in the mainstream discourse. However, it only shows that the agency and therefore the government should start taking its mandate finally seriously.
69 3.5 Integration versus anti-discrimination, race equality or diversity management
In the case of German politicians and the media focus on integration of ethnic minorities, and take little interest in discrimination. Hence, topics such as race equality or diversity management are from secondary interest in this regard. The EUMC’s German national focal point speaks of an under-developed anti- discrimination culture (Peucker 2006). Not concentrating on combating racial discrimination and racial inequalities, integration must be named as the dominant concept in the management of ethnic minorities in Germany. Although, integration is one of the over-used terms of policy making, in Germany, as well as for example in countries such as France, there has been little rigorous theoretical or empirical work on this topic. Moreover, integration has remained as an under- defined ideal which started featuring in order to justify a range of practices and discourses of immigration management. It is also a term, which is utilised to replace unfashionable terms such as for example assimilation, absorption, acculturation, inclusion and toleration (Favell 2001: 351). However, the change of terminology does not imply a change of the notion of integration. Sayad (2004: 217-218) argues that in the case of France,
… the word ‘integration’ has inherited the meanings of other concomitant notions such as adaption and assimilation. Each of these notions claims to be novel but they are in reality no more than different expressions, in different moments, in different contexts and for different social purposes, of the same sociological process.
In order to understand the German notion of integration, this section examines firstly international literature on integration, which gives insights regarding the development of the theory of integration. Afterwards, we focus on the theory of integration evolved in Germany. The last two parts of this section focus on the ethnocentric discourse on integration and on racist undertones of integration policies in Germany, preparing the ground for the discussion held in the analysis chapter titled: Integracism as a mechanism of habitus. Discussing the concept of integration is in particular important as it gives account to the macro context of managing ethnic diversity in Germany, as questioned in research question one. While in other countries such as the USA and the UK diversity management evolved due to affirmative action and equal opportunities at work programs, in Germany it is the concept of integration, which gives the basis and frame for the development of diversity management programs. Hence, it is necessary to understand the notion of integration in the German context. However, before scrutinising the German context the following section is set out to provide a brief introduction into the theory of integration.
3.5.1 Theory of integration
This section presents different theories concerned with the integration of immigrants, starting with an assimilationist notion of integration, which emerged firstly in the American ‘Chicago School’. After that we examine approaches more focused on race relations, diversity management and multiculturalism, which substituted former assimilationist approaches and are currently dominant perspectives in countries such as the USA, Australia, Canada and the UK.
Research on immigrants and the eventual outcomes of the processes of immigration date back to the early days of ‘the Chicago school’ of social science in America at the turn of the 20th century (Portes 1978). Their work focused on immigration, ethnic, and urban studies, which laid the basis of migration research. At that time, an essentially assimilationist perspective was present in the study of the integration of immigrants. According to the Oxford dictionary assimilation is “A term synonymous with acculturation, used to describe the process by which an outsider, immigrant, or subordinate group becomes indistinguishably integrated into the dominant host society.” The shared notion of assimilation theory was that assimilation would be a natural and ,evolutionary process. It was expected that as time passed assimilation would be the definite outcome (Park and Burgess 1921; Park 1928, 1950; Thomas and Znaniecki 1927). For instance Park (1950),
71 developed the theory of the ‘race relations cycle’, a cycle of stages of interaction through which immigrants or ethnic groups progressed indestructibly. A notion, which in its view understands the integration process as an intergenerational process, where integration is only a matter of time and sequences. According to Park the different stages consist of contact, competition, and accommodation, leading at the end into assimilation. Park understands four different stages (contact, competition, and accommodation, leading at the end into assimilation) of the development of inter-ethnic relations as a consequence of immigration. The first initial friendly phase of contact leads into the second phase, which is marked by conflicts over limited resources. In the third phase, these conflicts then resolve with the appearance of spatial segregations and ethnic divisions of labour in a process of so-called accommodation. The last and forth fourth phase is the emergence of irresistible and irreversible (societal) assimilation. Thereby, the relevance of the ethnic dimension steady disappears in the course of generations.
However, only in 1964, Gordon contested this perspective with his book ‘Assimilation in American life’ showing that assimilation cannot be understood as a natural one-way process. Gordon highlighted the generational change in immigrant groups, in showing that for instance the first generation or foreign born were less assimilated than the second-generation American-born children. Furthermore Gordon (1964) distinguished among cultural and structural assimilation. Cultural assimilation requires a process of acculturation on the part of the immigrants. Acculturation takes place in becoming similar in cultural patterns, such as language, behavior, and values. However, the foremost important difference compared to for example Park’s notion of assimilation is Gordon’s typology of structural assimilation, which considers for the first time the host society as a factor of influence regarding the assimilation of immigrants. According to Gordon, structural assimilation results only when immigrants are "taken up and incorporated". This means, that immigrants and their children have to be fully integrated into the major institutions of the society such as educational, occupational and political institutions. It also means, that immigrants need to be fully integrated into social cliques, clubs, and institutions of the core society. This
72 process of integration than leads in the optimal case to intimate primary relationships and intermarriages with members of the receiving country.
Gordon might have been the first American scholar considering the importance of structural and institutional integration, however we can find a very similar argument in an earlier work from Eisenstadt in his book ‘The Absorption of Immigrants’. Eisenstadt (1955), which has been merely concentrated on the integration of Jewish immigrants to Israel, identified three main interdependent indices of the absorption (he used the term of absorption instead of assimilation) of immigrants within their new country. The first and the second indices, acculturation and personal adjustment, refer to the way in which immigrants adapt to the new country. The last indicator, institutional dispersion and concentration, which Eisenstadt considered to be the most powerful regarding the absorption or integration of immigrants, deals with the properties of a group. In other words, institutional dispersion refers to the extent of dissemination of immigrants within the main institutional dimensions of the new country, such as family, economic, political and religious dimensions, and its place in the social structure of the absorbing country. Moreover, Eisenstadt believed that absorption only could happen if the migrant group would stop having a separate identity within the new social structure. Finally, he saw the complete loss of a separate identity of migrant groups as the best indicator of absorption into the new social system.
However, the so-called classic assimilation theories have all in common that aspects such as race discrimination or inequality have been ignored. Consequently in the USA the prominence of research on immigrants and their integration disappeared in the 1960s, partly as a result of the influx of racial demands due to Civil Rights Movement. The former analytical focus on the assimilation and integration of immigrants shifted to that of race relations and equal opportunities (Portes 1978). Alongside
the so-called classical model of assimilation, first formulated by Robert Park and later perfected by Milton Gordon, fell into disrepute in American
73 ethnic studies. In its place there appeared in quick succession different conceptualizations of the mechanisms, “contents”, and direction of these adaptive processes: ethnicization, instrumental ethnicity, and, more recently, an approach stressing the socially constructed character of ethnic phenomena” (Morawska 1994).
However, these developments then added to the acceptance of cultural diversity and the promotion of multiculturalism. The concept of multiculturalism, gained first broad attention and distribution in the 1970s in Canada and Australia due to government policies created to assist in the management of ethnic pluralism within the national state. From a liberal perspective multiculturalism is viewed as a social policy presenting itself as a positive alternative for assimilation policies. Its stands generally for valuing cultural diversity, as well as for the recognition of citizenship rights and the recognition of cultural identities of ethnic minority groups (Kymlycka, 1995; Taylor, 1992). Conversely coming from activist standpoint multiculturalism “stands for a left-radicalist attempt to overturn dominant, monocultural conceptions of history and society, which were considered ethnocentric or even racist. In the USA, multiculturalism in this sense came into wide public use during the early 1980s in the context of public (state) school curriculum reform. School curricula were criticized for their so-called Eurocentric bias and their failure to acknowledge the achievements of women, people of color, or people from outside the tradition of Western civilization” (Ang 2005: 35). Although the concept of multiculturalism has become prominent in many Western-countries such as for example the USA, Australia, Canada and the UK, multiculturalism has remained a controversial concept, criticised from both liberal and more activist angles. However,
these diverse critical strands have in common that they consider multiculturalism, as a state-managed policy and discourse, as not going far enough in transforming the white-dominated dominant culture” (Ang 2005: 35).
74 In particular criticism coming from a more activist angle is concerned with the currently dominant approach of emphasizing a solely decorative celebration of cultural diversity, which renders the struggle against racism and moreover dilutes racism. Exactly this dilution of discrimination and inequality is viewed as problematic. For example in the UK Kersten (2000) pointed out that the diversity management discourse ignores structural and institutional forms of racism. Additionally, we can observe in the UK, a shift from equal opportunities to diversity management (Özbilgin 2008: 3) and that in many British organisations the language of diversity management has replaced the language of equal opportunities (Kirton and Green 2006: 2). Therewith, there is no reference to disadvantaged groups as target of diversity management and terms as racism or discrimination are not part of the diversity management language (Agocs and Burr 1996).
Finally, a further recently growing area is the study of transnational migration and transnationalism (Esser 2003; Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt 1999; Vertovec 1999, 2001; Guarnizo and Smith 1998; Kearney 1995). Transnationalism refers to the phenomenon according to which “increasing numbers of people move and live in a “transnational space”, and which assumes that belonging to a nation state has been loosened” (European Commission 2008: 33). Transnational migrants are according to Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt (1999: 1-2) “persons who live dual lives: speaking two languages, having homes in two countries, and making a living through continuous regular contact across national borders. Activities within the transnational field comprise a whole gamut of economic, political and social initiatives – ranging from informal import-export businesses, to the rise of a class of binational professionals, to the campaigns of home country politicians among their expatriates”.
While some scholars argue that transnational migration is not something new as migrants have been always moving back and forth, others argue that until recently the number of such people has not been so considerable. However, due to globalisation, particularly due to the globalisation of capital we do face nowadays
75 an emergent social field of transnational migration (Glick Schiller et. al. 1992 a, 1992b; Basch et. al. 1994; Guarnizo and Smith 1998.) This development is viewed by some in a very positive way, particularly in regard of the idea of the liberalisation of the world as known so far. However, others view transnational migration and transnationalism as a threat. Some believe that transnational migration leads in a crisis of the nation-state. Moreover, the nation-state is seen as weakened “by transnational capital, global media, and emergent supra-national political institutions” (Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt (2001: 2). Thereby, transnational calls attention to the cultural and political projects of nation- states as they vie for hegemony in relations with other nation-states, with their citizens and aliens (Kearney 1995). Though, others see the threat in the emergence of cultural hybridity, fostered by transnational migration. For instance, cultural hybridity is feared of destroying national identities. Cultural hybridity, especially the emergence of ‘hybrid’ cultural identities due to the multicultural constitution of modern nation-states and the emergence of transnational forms of popular culture (Nederveen Pieterse 1995; Werbner and Modood 1997) is highly discussed particularly within cultural studies and in post-colonial studies.
The term cultural hybridity is particularly associated with Bhabha (1995). In his piece ‘Cultural Diversity and Cultural Differences' he particularly emphasises the interdependent relationship of coloniser and colonized. However, Bhabha argues that all cultural systems are constructed in what he calls the
Third Space of Enunciation'. Moreover Bhaba advocates a notion of an international culture “not based on exoticism or multiculturalism of the diversity of cultures, but on the inscription and articulation of culture's hybridity ”(Bhabha 1995: 209).
However, the notion of transnationalism is in particular criticised by scholars engaging with theories regarding the integration of immigrants. For instance it is argued that the study of transnationalism “overlooks the fact that integration primarily is still a process that takes place in a nation state context and its
76 institutions” (European Commission 2008: 33). Similar criticism comes from Esser (2003) a prominent integration scholar in Germany arguing that it is in the very own interest of transnational immigrants to assimilate to certain institutional and cultural cores. However, this displays the strong assimilionist perspective, currently dominant in Germany, which is discussed in the next section.
3.5.2 Theory of integration in Germany
This section focuses on Esser’s theory of integration of immigrants in Germany. Esser’s theory of integration is assimilationist in its notion and currently the most used integration theory in Germany. While in the USA as well as in countries such as Canada, Australia and the UK the so-called classical models of assimilation found disregard, they found immense consideration in studying the integration of immigrants in Germany. Despite the fact, that the initial debate viewed the classical assimilation theory as not applicable, based on the thought that immigrations flows to Western-European are not comparable with immigration processes in so-called classical immigration countries such as the USA, Australia and Canada (Hoffmann-Nowotny 1973, Esser 1980).
According to Geißler and Pöttker (2006), German migration studies have in the past been dominated by an assimilative notion of integration. Hence, the idea of cultural diversity and the promotion of multiculturalism and race equality have been overlooked. Reversal the aim to assimilate immigrant minorities and ‘restore’ the mono-cultural society is in the centre of the study of integration in Germany. In particular, the integration theory of Esser (1980, 1983, 2003, 2006) is perceived as the most prominent and most theoretical and methodological comprehensive theory regarding the integration of immigrants in Germany (Nauck 1988). Esser’s notion of integration needs to be discussed for two different reasons. Firstly, regarding the influence of the so-called classic American assimilation models on Esser’s notion of integration, which as mentioned previously have been disregarded in the American context. Esser (1980) refers to Eisenstadt and Gordon’s theorisations as so far the most
77 developed and most systematic approaches regarding the integration of immigrants. For instance, in 2001 Esser argued, when writing his report for the so-called Süßmuth Commission (Independent Commission on Migration to Germany, set up by the German Government) that in a receiving society social integration is in fact only possible in the form of assimilation (Esser 2001).
Esser’s notion of integration is that the assimilative concept aims at cognitive, social and identifying assimilation (which he sees as the final destination of integration) of ethno-cultural minorities to a mainstream culture. The key difference to former assimilation models is that according to Esser (2003) assimilation depends mainly on the rational choice of the individual migrant, who must come to terms with the structural conditions faced. Hence, the responsibility for assimilation lies solely on side of the individual immigrant. In this regard Esser argues that immigrants should have the intention to assimilate. This intention should include an interest in the receiving country capital, such as formal education or to learn the host country’s language.
Along with these arguments, Esser believes that the ‘problems’ faced by migrants and their offspring, can be attributed to a lack of receiving-country capital. He argues that the ethnic group capital that immigrant individuals hold, such as the sending country’s language or ethnic social capital is less efficient than receiving- country capital. In his view, ethnic capital in contrast to more generalized (mainstream) capital leads to segregation. Esser’s reference to the importance of social capital regarding the process of the integration of immigrants, brings us to the second reason making it relevant to discuss his notion of integration. Such as Bourdieu he utilizes the concept of social capital. However, Esser’s classification of different kinds of capital includes some extensions to the discussion on social capital. Esser particularly points to a two-sidedness of social capital. This extension is often cited in the German speaking literature.
Esser (1999) defines social capital as a set of resources and goods that an individual is able to mobilize and consume only in the course of being a part of a
78 particular network of actors. Dissimilar to economic capital, the production and accumulation of social capital is dependent on the establishment of relations to other actors and can therefore not be produced by a single actor. Consequently, social capital possibly will have emergent properties, which cannot be reduced to the individual level properties. Esser is one of the leading scholars in the study of the integration of immigrants in Germany. His notion of integration is often the basis on which research on the integration of immigrants is carried out in Germany. This includes for instance a major part of research conducted for or by the government. Therefore, his notion is omnipresent when looking at integration policies in Germany, which is done in the now following section of this chapter.
3.5.3 The ethnocentric discourse and policies on integration
According to Sayad (2004) the discourse on integration is loaded with symbolic secondary meanings, hindering to understand the phenomenon of integration in its true nature. He further argues that the discourse on and the notion of integration are based on what he calls an unconscious ethnocentrism. This underlying unconscious ethnocentrism is based on a superior stand from which the rules and the notion of integration according to the dominant culture are set, as well as the definition of what must be produced and what not. The ethnocentric nature of discourse is also reflected in migration literature, which is predominantly concentrated on how the majority society perceives and deals with immigrants as a source of potential problems (Bourdieu 2004). On the other hand, it has rarely been investigated how immigrants transform the country of settlement (Yurdakul 2009). The dominant group imposes rules and modes of integration on ethnic minorities, not taking into account their very own role in the process of the integration of ethnic minorities. Thereby, ethnic minorities themselves are excluded from the creation of the integration process, and at the same time the dominant not anticipated to assimilate by themselves to ethnic minorities (Sayad 2004).
While the concept of integration is underpinned by an assumption of permanent settlement and acceptance of the idea of immigration in other countries (Favell
79 2001), the contrary has been the case in Germany until recently. Despite the fact that Germany received, after the USA, the largest inflow of immigrants in the OECD area over the past 15 years (Liebig 2007), the idea that Germany is an immigration country has only lately been gaining ground. In this manner, ethnic minorities remained in the guest worker status for a far too long time, even though they had already settled down in Germany. For instance Sayad (2004: 30- 31) argues that the guest worker model
does not disturb the moral, political and social order of the host country, which can accept and use emigrants all the more easily and in greater number when it can allow itself to treat them as though they were simply ‘in transit’.
The idea of the immigrants as in transit prevailed for a long time, which was reflected in a long-standing policy on guest workers. German society has only recently accepted that the context of immigration has changed. Thereby, integration in Germany meant that institutions such as the labour market, education and housing were opened up to migrants through allowing them access to the general welfare state and the social policy system. As the citizenship laws restricted access to immigrants and the implication of this restriction militated against true legal integration of migrants, placing them in an ambivalent position in the German social policy context (Borkert et al. 2007). The fact that the immigrants will not be going home and that some of their descendants are now German nationals is generating to some extent a different approach to integration. Particularly the integration problems of second- and third-generation ethnic minority Turks in Germany have lately become a matter of discussion (Simon 2007).
However, the approach towards the integration of immigrants changed only in 1998 with the public acknowledgment of being an immigration country by the SPD/Green government. “Only the new government coalition accepted the new social reality of immigration and introduced a new era in migration policy” (Will
80 and Rühl 2004: 14). Until that time Germany “… has not developed a more concise migration policy, and along with that, it had not recognised the necessary measures regarding the consequences of that huge immigration, especially the consequences concerning the integration of the immigrants” (Hönekopp et al. 2002: 7). Hence, this development meant a turn away from the mainly restrictive direction of migration policies from the previous conservative governments.
Clearly, the acknowledgement, by the red-green coalition, of the social reality that Germany is an immigration country introduced an historic “paradigm shift” in the immigration debate. The first result of this paradigm shift was the reform of the citizenship law introducing the concept of naturalisation as an important step in bringing the integration process into official policy.
Unlike France, which was eager to grant citizenship to new immigrants, Germany held fast to its notorious Empire- and State-Citizenship Law of 1913, which invoked an ethnic, descent-based principle of national belonging. Under this law, a person could be born, work, and die on German soil without ever becoming a German citizen (Göktürk et al. 2007: 3).
In 2000 the new law on citizenship, including the ius soli concept for children of foreigners born in Germany, was introduced. Further steps included the establishment of an independent commission on immigration (Süssmuth Commission) and Green Card Regulations for non-German specialists in the year 2000. In particular, the third section of the 2001 report on immigration from the Süssmuth Commission (Bericht der unabhängigen Kommission Zuwanderung, 2001), which focussed on integration, has been another important step towards the change of integration policies in Germany. “Under the heading ‘Fördern und Fordern’ (supporting and demanding), the commission recommended individual integration contracts, obliging the state to offer integration courses to new immigrants, and obliging migrants to participate in these courses as well as pay part of the expenses” (Borkert and Bosswick et al. 2007: 16). This report led then
81 to the long overdue new Immigration Law (Zuwanderungsgesetz) in 2002. However, the Federal Constitutional court declared the law as invalid for formal reasons in the same year (Meier- Braun, 2002: 105-139). After all, the law came only into force with the Act for Controlling and Limiting Immigration of 2005 (Gesetz zur Steuerung und Begrenzung der Zuwanderung). According to Hönekopp et al. 2002:3):
The law aims at a comprehensive reform of foreign resident law. Contrary to the current Foreigners Law, the new law is to include regulations concerning the gainful employment of non-German residents, in order to simplify and structure the various legal residence and immigration titles. In addition, the legislation also aims at fostering integration: Under the new law, for example, new residents would generally be obliged to participate in integration courses. However, the government migration bill does not comprise explicit anti-discrimination regulations.
However, the public acknowledgment of being an immigration country by the SPD/Green government and the therewith-connected introduction of new laws for immigration, integration and citizenship eradicating the concept of Volk tied together by ius sanguinis was not entirely welcome. For instance, the opposition Christian Democratic Union (CDU) made an electoral issue of Ausländerpolitik, particularly on integration, condemning the government of jeopardising German cultural identity.
What ensued was the Leitkulturdebatte, about Germany’s predominant culture, characterised by the notion of the ‘clash of civilisations’ and the incompatibility of ‘different’ cultures. This not only replaced racial belonging with cultural belonging, transforming the ius sanguinis into an equally essentialist ius cultus, it also formed part of a conservative attempt to re-establish a ‘normal’ German national consciousness, cleared of the memory of the Holocaust (Pautz 2005: 1).
82 Recently, the German government discusses the idea of integration contracts, with the purpose to bind new immigrants to the ‘German values’. "We will draw up contracts with new immigrants," Commissioner for Immigration and member of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservative Christian Democrats (CDU) Maria Böhmer told the Stuttgarter Nachrichten daily on November 23rd 2009, "In those contracts will be set out what they can expect in terms of support and help. But they will also set out what we can expect from immigrants.” According to Böhmer, the contract would include German values that newcomers should abide by such as for example freedom of speech and sex equality. She moreover pronounced "everyone who wants to live and work here long term must say 'Yes' to our country. To this belongs proficiency in the German language, but also a readiness to take part in society”. Finally, she added that in exchange immigrants "can expect help and support.” Additionally, Böhmer under the direction of chancellor Angela Merkel and particularly driven by the EU introduced different diversity initiatives, for example the campaign “Diversity as chance” (Vielfalt als Chance) and the Diversity Charta 2006 (Charta der Vielfalt), promoting the organisational integration of ethnic minority workers. Lastly, a further step regarding integration polices is the National Integration Plan (Nationaler Integrationsplan) introduced by Böhmer and Merkel in 2006, declaring the integration of ethnic minorities as a key issue for the government.
So far, we have been mainly examining integration policies coming from federal ministries. Today, the Ministry of the Interior (BMI), the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMA) and the Ministry of Family, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth (BMFSFJ) have the main competences for migration and integration policy at the federal level. Additionally, the Ministry of the Interior acquired extended competences in the field of integration measures, under the Immigration Law (Zuwanderungsgesetz) of 2002. The responsibility for integration measures at the national level was transferred to the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF). However, there are some specific features of German migration and integration policy, which need to be mentioned. First of all, the competences of the federal ministries have to be seen as quite limited, as Germany is a federal
83 state. Implementing home affair policies is for the most part up to the national ministries (Länderministerien). For instance, national ministries hold full responsibility for the school system and education at all levels. The federal ministries only have certain control at the national level in the area of labour and youth. Therefore, the vision of a coherent integration policy, aimed by for example the National Integration Plan, is difficult to realise.
One more important aspect of integration policy is the role of welfare agencies, which are relevant political players as they are for instance closely linked to the churches. Three out of six welfare agencies are religious welfare agencies. The six welfare agencies are the Catholic Caritas, Protestant Diakonie, Jewish ZWST, the labour movement’s AWO, the non-partisan umbrella organisation DPWV, and the German Red Cross. However, in Germany public responsibilities are commissioned to non-statutory welfare agencies, which receive public funds on the national, state, district and local level, as well as EU funds. Welfare agencies organize the vast majority of services of integration measures. Such measures are aiming for instance the structural integration of the ethnic minorities at the workplace (Borkert and Bosswick 2007). Turks as a predominantly Muslim ethnic group fall largely outside the remit of the provision of this limited religious welfare system.
The context of social policy in Germany indicates a structure of traditional mechanisms of social welfare. However, the instruments of this welfare regime are not designed to capture the varied needs of the diverse ethnic population. Specific requirements to move ethnic minority individuals out of poverty and low levels of education to skilled work and better education is not within the scope of the current social policy priorities in Germany. Instead, the social policy concentrates on integration as a choice for ethnic minorities (Esser 1999, 2000, 2001, 2006), and Turks in particular, and dismisses the possibility that true integration may require both sides to invest into a process of learning and development. Furthermore, current debates on integration largely deny the existence of race discrimination in Germany. Such practices can be also found in
84 the UK. For instance Colley and Hodkinson (2001: 1) argue that in the case of the UK “deep-seated structural inequalities are rendered invisible, as social exclusion is addressed through a strongly individualistic strategy based on personal agency.”
3.5.4 Racist undertones of the notion of integration in Germany: Integracism
In order to denote the implicitly racist nature of discourses and practices of integration, which are predicated on mythical notions of an ideal state of social reality, which immigrants may be encouraged to emulate, this section introduces the term integracism. I demonstrate that the notion of integration is not only loaded with ethnocentrism, but also with racism since particular ethnic minority groups are declared and discussed of not being willing or able to integrate into the German society. It could be argued that the dominant notion of integration disregards the agency of immigrants and ethnic minorities, particularly through acts of symbolic violence, leading to the corrosion of the notion of integration with racial bias particularly against ethnic minority individuals.
In the case of Germany this disregard of ethnic minority individual agency applies particularly for ethnic minority Turks as well as other ethnic minorities from so- called ‘Muslim countries’. While, for example ethnic minorities Spaniards, Greeks or Italians are seen as easy to integrate, ethnic minority Turks are constantly accused of being unable and unwilling to integrate into German society (see for example Neumeyer 2009). Ironically the educational outcomes of ethnic minority Italians are lower then those of ethnic minority Turks.
One example for such integracism is a recent article from the ‘Die Welt Online’ (2009). This article titled “Why Turks do not play along with integration” discusses a study from the Berlin Institut für Bevölkerung und Entwicklung (2009), concerned with the state of integration of ethnic minorities. The article comes to the conclusion that Turks are unwilling to integrate and that it is clear that Turks themselves are responsible for their ‘unfortunate’ situation. It is stated that despite the fact that half of ethnic minority Turks are already born in
85 Germany that no other immigrant group distinguishes more negatively from Germans then Turks. They are less educated, less paid and more often unemployed and only thirty-two per cent are naturalised and young Turks are not interested in gaining educational credentials.
It could be argued that the notion of integration is racially biased in Germany, drawing on the common assumption in Germany that some groups are easily to integrate while other groups, such as ethnic minority Turks, are problematic. This dominant view that ethnic minority Turks are problematic is intensified through a constant negative portrayal of this ethnic group in the dominant discourse. This negative portrayal of ethnic minority Turks serves underlying the idea that ethnic minority Turks themselves are hindering the integration process and therefore are problematic to integrate. For instance Sayad (2004: 220) argues concerning the notion of integration
… ethnic minorities are remembered only in order to criticize them, to criticize them for their bad assimilation; that is their fault, whereas good assimilation is to the credit and the profit of the assimilating society.
Additionally, the dominant discourse ignores the existence of highly skilled ethnic minority members, people, who constitute a sizeable population (Müller 2005). Ignoring this group only supports for the stereotypical fantasies of ethnic difference that dominant ideology in Germany seem to perpetuate.
However, this is the moment when racism emerges in the concept of integration, as especially ethnic minority Turks are seen as ‘the’ ethnic group unable and unwilling to integrate. Thereby, a whole ethnic group is allocated of being unable and unwilling to integrate. Obviously, ethnic minority Turks are ethicised in such a way, which undermines the diversity of their experiences, agency and humanity. The agency of minority ethnic citizens remains ignored and their self-descriptions are often dismissed. This racial bias, which feeds the notion of integration, can be seen as the basis on which the term ‘integracism’ has been created. This term
86 refers particularly to the former described phenomenon of allocating one particular ethnic group of being less willing and able to integrate, which clearly must be seen as racism. It further refers to the fact that not only the analysis of integration but also the notion of integration is generally ethnocentric, based on a superior stand of the dominant culture, which sets the rules and the notion of integration and assimilation according to the dominant culture.
3.6 Conclusion
This chapter demonstrated that the notion of integration in Germany is not only underlined by an assimilationist idea of integration, but also by an ethnocentric and racial biased notion of integration. Certainly the situation of ethnic minority Turks in education and employment must be viewed as poor. Conversely, it could be argued that integration and migration analysts fail to ask themselves about the diversity of causes and reasons of the trajectories leading to such outcomes (Bourdieu 2004). Reviewing the literature revealed that the notion of integration is underlined by what Bourdieu (2004) calls a “unconscious ethnocentrism” which only sees the ‘others’ hindering their very own (by own I refer to the majority group) vision of an successful integration process. There is an obvious habitus of allocating particular ethnic groups as unable and unwilling to integrate indicates clearly the existence of racist undertones in the notion of integration in Germany. It could be argued that the analysts of the Berlin Institute report and the author of the Die Welt Online article ignored for instance the fact that education, skills, experience and qualifications are not equally accessible across socio-demographic lines and that belonging to an ethnic minority, particularly to the group of ethnic minority Turks seems to be hindrance in attaining educational credentials. For instance, the Special Rapporteur from the Human Rights council investigating contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in Germany believes
… that the question of racism should also be approached from the standpoint of structures and institutions that facilitate the integration of
87 such migrants into German society and that provide them with the necessary skills to allow them and future generations to prosper. The new approach devised by the Government with regard to the integration of migrants recognizes the need for a broad and comprehensive understanding of racism. However, such understanding has yet to fully permeate all relevant institutions, in particular the police, immigration services and the courts, which are key in implementing anti- discrimination provisions (United Nations 2010: 16-17).
Strikingly, the above made point is of immense importance, since this chapter showed that the notion of integration in Germany is underlined by an ethnocentric discourse and policies on integration, as well as by racist undertones of the notion of integration. However, there is no such critical examination of institutions that facilitate the integration of ethnic minorities in Germany as advocated in the above comment, and also the notion of integration remains unchallenged and unquestioned in Germany.
Moreover, this chapter illustrated the employment profile of immigrants in Germany and examined racial discrimination in employment in Germany. It was shown that Germany not only does not engage critically with its notion of integration, but also that Germany’s anti-discrimination culture appears as rather weak. This makes the concept of integration the dominant concept of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. However, this must be viewed as problematic, since the notion of integration in Germany rather focuses on the assimilation of ethnic minorities into the dominant culture rather than accepting and valuing the diversity of ethnic minorities. Thinking of a concept such as diversity management seems rather challenging, since the notion of diversity management does not suggest to assimilate ethnic minorities, but rather to value their diversity. However, the next chapter gives an account to diversity management, in describing the evolution of diversity management, and in examining diversity management in the German context.
88 Chapter Four
Diversity management: theory and practice
4.1 Introduction
This chapter starts with a brief overview of the evolution of diversity management. Based on the review of literature from the USA, the UK and Germany this chapter then illustrates that diversity management in Germany has found a very different interpretation to diversity management in countries such as for example the USA and the UK. The USA and the UK have been selected on the premise that diversity management has been framed, among other strands of diversity, to deal with the inclusion of ethnic minorities, contrary to Germany were diversity management is predominately thought of in relation to woman equality. A further reason for choosing these two countries is the fact that in both countries diversity management came after the countries had already developed comprehensive anti-discrimination regulation and equal opportunity measures. For instance Wrench (2001: 26) argues
In the US, before the advent of diversity management there had existed for many years strong anti- discrimination legislation, contract compliance and affirmative action which had already produced employment opportunities for members of previously excluded groups, and helped to produce an ethnically mixed workforce. In Europe there is still nothing like laws and practices of this strength.
This does apply particularly for Germany, where for example the first comprehensive anti-discrimination law was only introduced in 2006. This means that diversity management in Germany, contrary to the notion of diversity management in the USA and the UK, is not incorporating the notion of equal opportunities and anti-discrimination. It is very relevant to clarify one particular issue before continuing this chapter. Nowadays, in the UK and in the USA
89 diversity management can be understood as an umbrella, under which concepts such as equal opportunities, race equality and anti-discrimination are included. Then again, this is not the case in Germany; as such concepts simply do not exist at least in relation to racial matters. This information is very relevant for the reader, particularly for the British or American reader. As in these countries, the notion of diversity management incorporates concepts such as such as equal opportunities, race equality and anti-discrimination. However, when talking about diversity management in the German context, this is simply not the case. An additional relevant reason for reviewing the USA and the UK is that in both countries diversity management is now highly criticised in failing dealing with race related issues (Kersten 2000; Wrench 2005). These insights are in particular interesting considering that in Germany diversity management is currently seen by the government as a tool to aid the better integration of ethnic minority workers.
This chapter also provides a section, discussing global diversity management, which stands for an international perspective to managing diversity rather than a domestic one. Finally, the chapter provides concluding remarks.
4.2 Evolution of diversity management: theory and practice
Diversity Management has its roots in the U.S. civil rights movement and evolved from affirmative action and equal employment opportunity programs. Under the pressure of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, among other social and governmental pressures, different human resource practices were implemented in the 1970s and 1980s (Konrad and Linnehan 1995). Affirmative action and equal employment opportunity programs were thought to increase the presence of underrepresented groups, such as woman and ethnic minorities. However, some of these programmes were only of symbolic nature or found to be illegal or inadequately implemented and practiced. As a result, these programs have been subject to criticism in terms of fairness and integrity (Linnehan and Konrad 1999; Kravitz and Platania 1993). Yet, there is apparent evidence that affirmative action and
90 equal employment opportunity programs made a positive impact on the presence and pay of underrepresented groups (Blau and Beller 1988, Fosu 1992). Besides, these programs laid the foundation for contemporary diversity management.
Contrary to affirmative action and equal employment opportunity programs with its target towards underrepresented groups, diversity management was thought as a measure to help dealing with social differences such as for example gender, ethnicity, age and sexual orientation and breaking down cultures of dominance. Moreover, diversity management was thought to enable equal opportunities in organisations, which were subject to criticism in the early 1990s (Ashkanasy et al. 2002; Carroll and Hannan 2000; Thomas 1990). It was also thought to help organisations to give minority groups access in order to benefit from their for instance ethnic diversity that this process will engender (Thomas 1990; Lorbiecki and Jack 2000). This shift is clearly reflected in for instance Kandola and Fullerton (1998) definition of diversity management, which is the most cited definition in the diversity management field:
The basic concept of managing diversity accepts that the workforce consists of a diverse population of people. The diversity consists of visible and non-visible differences, which include factors such as sex, age, background, race, disability, personality and work style. It is founded on the premise that harnessing these differences will create a productive environment in which everyone feels valued, where their talents are being fully utilised and in which organisational goals are met (Kandola and Fullerton 1998: 7).
It is argued that in considering the relations of different social categories, like gender, class, and race (Lerner 2004; Grusky and Szelenyi 2006; Loden and Rosener 1991; Ely and Thomas 2001; Gardenwartz and Row 1998), diversity management opens an intersectional perspective where the hierarchies of different social categories or dimensions can be analysed as well as the connected inequalities and power relations can be examined. However, for instance Thomas
91 (1995) argues that diversity does not automatically mean “with respect to race and gender” and describes diversity as not synonymous with differences but encompasses differences and similarities. Nonetheless, this intersectional diversity perspective is viewed as an advantage over equal opportunities, with its emphasis on sameness and a focus on gender and ethnicity, which led to criticism by the majority group members in organisations (Thomas 1990).
The advantage of diversity management is seen in its focus on differences and inclusion, referring to a model of inclusion of all employees and not only particular disadvantaged groups. Diversity management represents a shift from a legislation and representation driven approach, to a voluntary and proactive approach regarding the inclusion of minority groups and organisational change in terms of equal opportunities. Some researches even denote that diversity management programmes have moved further than only the legal compliance with equality legislations. For instance, it is argued that differences are accepted and valued due to diversity management programmes (Cassell 2001). It is also argued that learning from diversity becomes possible (Thomas and Ely 1996), accompanied by a development in the direction of the full and equal utilization of abilities through empowerment and inclusion (Cornelius and Bassett-Jones 2002).
However, the term diversity management is now used commonly in the management field (Cassell and Biswas 2000; Özbilgin and Tatli 2008, Özbilgin 2008), contested to improve the efficiency and competitive ability of organisations, and to use the potential and abilities of its diverse workgroups (Cox and Blake 1991; Watson et al. 1993; Bhadury et al. 2000). For example in the UK, there is a shift from equal opportunities to diversity management (Özbilgin 2008) and in many British organisations the language of diversity management has replaced the language of equal opportunities (Kirton and Green 2006). Thereby, there is no reference to disadvantaged groups as target of diversity management and terms as racism or discrimination are not part of the diversity management language (Agocs and Burr 1996). This change from equal opportunities to diversity management can be viewed as a dilution of equality
92 efforts. Exactly this dilution of discrimination and inequality is viewed as problematic. For example in the UK, Kersten (2000) pointed out that the diversity management discourse ignores structural and institutional forms of racism. Further criticism can be grouped in mainly five thematically points: a) diversity management is a soft option, compared with former measures; b) diversity management dilutes the focus on race; c) the moral argument is replaced by business arguments; and d) that the basis of social inequality is mystified by that (Wrench 2005: 75-81). Lastly, diversity management is criticised of being only a voluntary approach on the side of employers, rather than a legal enforcement as in the case of equal opportunities practices (Thomas 1990; Morrison 1992; Gilbert and Ivancevich 2000; Soni 2000).
Nevertheless, in Germany diversity management is seen as a useful tool to aid the better integration of ethnic minorities. Despite that in the USA and the UK the diversity management concept is viewed as problematic when aiming the inclusion of ethnic minorities. The government in Germany seems to have a different picture of the factual implementation and efficiency of diversity management in countries such as the USA and the UK. This could be explained by a lack of information. In this context, it seems over-optimistic to expect that diversity management could be the right approach for the German context. The question is now, to what extent we can expect that managing diversity will be the right instrument to include ethnic minorities.
To what extent organisational diversity management policies and programmes can in fact deal with inequality and discrimination in the workplace depends particularly on the organisational efforts of management intervention attempting to create change in terms of workforce diversity. Thomas and Ely (1996) put forward four paradigms, describing the efforts of management intervention in workforce diversity: the resistance paradigm, the discrimination-and-fairness paradigm, the access-and-legitimacy paradigm and the learning-and-effectiveness paradigm. The resistance paradigm refers to the instance that organisations tend to resist change in terms of diversity, if pressure in form of for instance equal opportunities or diversity policy is absent. As a result, the organisation reproduces
93 inequality (Kirton and Greene 2005) and maintains the status qou (Dass and Parker 1999).
The second paradigm, the discrimination-and-fairness paradigm denotes an organisational focus on legislative actions, such as equal opportunities. Hence, the focus lays in the same and fair treatment of all employees (Thomas and Ely 1996). For instance, the organisation focuses on the recruitment of staff, in order to amplify the numbers of employees belonging to a disadvantaged group (Kandola and Fullerton 1998). The third paradigm, the access-and-legitimacy paradigm signifies the organisational focus on the business case for diversity management (Thomas and Ely 1996). This paradigm implies for instance to maximise the potential of every employee, in order to meet organisational goals, in creating an organisational culture that values and respects diversity (Kandola and Fullerton 1998).
The last paradigm, the learning-and-effectiveness paradigm, represents the organisational emphasis and connection of diversity with work and employee perspectives. In this paradigm, organisations move away from existent identity- groups to learning opportunities, in order to gain the benefits of diversity (Thomas and Ely 1996; Dass and Parker 1999). An open organisational culture is seen as a potential means to better performance standards (Thomas and Ely 1996). Moreover, employees are seen as an investment and a beneficial resource (Ely and Thomas 2001).
As outlined above, attempting to deal with inequality and discrimination in the workplace with diversity management requires more than only valuing diversity. It requires organisational change on all levels. However, organisational change is often tied to resistance. French and Bell (1999) argue that resistance to change is mostly entrenched in fears concerning perceived loss of status, power and influence. This is rather unsurprising, considering that organisational structures do serve preserving existent power relations and hierarchies. Workers show strong reactions, if existent organisational structures are subject to change. These
94 reactions can be fairly emotional and negative, which can lead to derail or even sabotage change efforts.
Unsurprisingly, organisational change in terms of workforce diversity is subject to resistance too (Thomas and Ely 1996). Some call this form of resistance “diversity resistance” (Thomas 2008). According to Thomas and Plaut (2008), there are many faces of diversity resistance in organisations, which do occur in different forms and at different levels. Hence, attempting to combat discrimination in the workplace, with diversity management, requires an understanding of these different modes of diversity resistance. A reoccurring obstacle in tackling discrimination at the work place with diversity management is the issue of power and privilege. For instance Bierema and Thomas (2008: 305) argue that:
… resistance is deeply rooted in hegemonic social structures that perpetuate resistance as if it were in the water; resistors are swimming in the entitlement of their privilege and the accompanying license not to trouble inequitable systems.
This insight calls to pay attention to existent power relations, when attempting to understand the habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. However, change in terms of workforce diversity not only calls for organisational efforts of management intervention, but also relies profoundly on the agency of diversity management stakeholders. According to Tatli and Özbilgin (2009a: 249-250)
Agency is an ephemeral concept, which often evades definition. Efforts to define and frame agency have engaged scholars from all disciplines of social sciences. However, the disciplinary polarization has meant that agency is often conceptualized either from explicitly individualized or from highly context-dependent perspectives. Nevertheless, increased attention to structure, agency and action debates in the social sciences has recently yielded the emergence of broadly syncretic conceptions of agency.
95 However, Emirbayer and Mische (1998: 970) define agency as:
… the temporally constructed engagement by actors of different structural environments – the temporal relational contexts of action – which, through the interplay of habit, imagination, and judgment, both reproduces and transforms those structures in interactive response to the problems posed by changing historical situations.
Emirbayer and Mische’s definition of agency highlights among other aspects habitus as one constituting pillar of agency, as well as setting agency in a structural, historical and therefore temporal relational context. This approach allows viewing agency as a not static concept, but rather as a concept that varies across time and geography. There is an increasing amount of management research on the issue of agency in relation to organisational change. However,
… diversity managers as agents of organisational change have remained a largely neglected topic of research. Due to their professed role in the design and implementation of diversity management policies and programs, diversity managers are the most visible actors in the process of managing diversity (Tatli and Özbilgin 2009b: 244).
This lack of interest in the agency of diversity managers is surprising, considering their key role in the design and implementation of the diversity management policies and programmes. Unsurprisingly, the same lack of interest in the agency of diversity managers can be noted in the German context, which is examined in the next section.
4.3 Diversity management in Germany
While in the UK the language of diversity management replaced the language of equal opportunities, this did not happen in the case of Germany. As mentioned previously, there is no anti-discrimination history in Germany concerned with race related issues. Therefore, diversity management, which has been a topic in
96 Germany since the 1990s, replaced only the language of equal opportunities in terms of gender in Germany, which has been subject to major criticism on side of feminist scholars.
However, both governmental and economic interest for the diversity management concept rose in recent times, particularly due to the implementation of the German Equal Treatment Law, forced by the European Union. The European Union promotes diversity management as a useful tool to combat discrimination all over the European Union. Like other European member countries, the German government started promoting diversity management as well (Cormack and Bell 2005). For instance, one example is the so-called initiative Charter der Vielfalt (Diversity Charta), which was signed by the federal government in 2006. On the homepage of the Charter of Diversity of German Companies we find following explanatory note:
The Charter of Diversity represents a fundamental commitment to appreciating and treating people fairly in business organisations. By signing it, organisations pledge to provide a work environment free of prejudice and discrimination. The Charter aims to establish an open corporate culture based on inclusion and mutual respect. And it aims to recognize and include people with differing talents in and outside the workforce in order to better serve customers' diverse needs.
Enterprises such as Daimler Chrysler, Deutsche Bank, German BP and Deutsche Telekom started the initiative in order to promote diversity in organisations. The Federal Government endorses and supports the initiative. Above and beyond, multi-national companies were the first to implement diversity management, even previous to the introduction of the AGG. For instance, companies such as Motorola or Ford simply transferred their diversity management agendas to their German plants. At the same time only a few German companies such as the Lufthansa, Die Deutsche Bahn and the Deutsche Telekom implemented diversity management practices (Schwarz-Wölzl and Maad 2005). However, this changed
97 then with the introduction of the Diversity Charta, which has been signed by more then 600 organisations to date. Of course, this popularization of diversity management is highly welcome, but must face concerns such as the scepticism of being for example only a fashionable trend and the suggestion of being merely rhetorical, particularly regarding race related issues.
Literature on diversity management in Germany has four themes of significance. First, and as mentioned before, diversity management has no human rights background in Germany and is not about the elimination of discrimination, contrary to for instance countries such as the UK or the USA. Diversity management entered research and also organisations in Germany directly as a human resource management concept (Koall et al. 2002; Krell 1996; Vedder 2006; Krell 2008).
Second, the gender issue dominates the scientific discourse on diversity management (Koall and Bruchhagen 2002; Hermes and Rohrmann 2006; Krell 2008). Researchers who were originally engaged with woman-studies do a large part of diversity management research. When these scholars moved from gender to diversity, the agenda of female emancipation and the struggle for equality have been retained as central foci of their work on diversity management. In this process race related issues have been excluded from their studies of diversity management. This is not surprising, considering that in Germany woman studies have been created by, and for native-German women (Bednarz-Braun 2004a; Lenz 1996). We can find a very similar history in the USA, where black feminists and migrant women were criticising the exclusiveness of gender studies and the absence of race related issues in feminist movements. Black feminists have levelled for example these two criticisms at mainstream feminist movements. The first critique is directed towards ethnocentrism and genderism (Kossek 1997), which neglected racism and other forms of discrimination (Higgingbotham 1992; King 1988). Second, black feminists called attention to the interconnection of race, class and gender, for which Kimberley Crenshaw developed the term “intersections” (Crenshaw 1989). This intersectional perspective is important; as
98 for example race inequality cannot be studied in isolation from for example gender.
The idea of intersections entered only recently the gender debate in Germany (Klinger and Knapp 2005). Although Gümen, a sociologist and member of an ethnic minority in Germany, argued already in 2003 that considering other social categories as for example race is one challenge of “new feminism”. Unfortunately, her voice remained unheard. One explanation could be that relevant research by ethnic minority women is largely ignored (Bednarz-Braun 2004b). Unsurprisingly white native-born German feminists and feminist scholars talking about race related issues are not ignored in Germany. A very good example is Alice Schwarzer, who is the most prominent contemporary German feminist and the founder and publisher of the German feminist journal EMMA. In Schwarzer’s (2010) latest book titled “Die große Verschleierung – Für Integration, gegen Islamismus” (The big veiling – For integration, against Islamic fundamentalism), she surprisingly starts engaging with race related issues. Her book and her views on integration are widely discussed in the mainstream debate since the book was published. This example is only one example, showing how native-born German feminists suddenly mutate to integration specialist.
In relation to diversity management only Otyakmaz and Roach (2008) criticised the exclusiveness of the gender dimension in diversity management research and practice. However, such critics are rare. In conclusion, diversity management in Germany can be seen as a field marked with majority ethnic perspective, due to over dominance of them in the field. Though, I continue to argue that in the case of Germany ethnicity should constitute a primary dimension of diversity. We can certainly not study ethnicity in isolation from other inequalities, but neither can we only study inequality intersections and ignore the historical and contextual specificity that differentiates the mechanisms that generate inequality by different social categories as for example gender and race (Risman 2004).
99 The third significant theme is that the research on diversity management concentrates mainly on business issues and consists largely of broad topics such as the diffusion of diversity management (Süß and Kleiner 2008), case descriptions (Frohnen 2005) or studies to advocate performance-driven business case arguments. However, we can rarely find research on the practice of diversity management, and no research on the moral case of race equality such as the elimination of discrimination and inequality.
Examining the applied theories and epistemological underpinnings of relevant studies brings us to the last point. Research in Germany is mainly concentrated on a bundle of theories that ignore the specificity of organisational dynamics, power relations and inequality producing structures in relation to ethnic minorities. For example, the systems theory perspective (Baecker 2007; Elmerich 2007; Knoth 2006; Koall 2001; Frohnen 2005) is applied to analyse diversity management and to describe the construction, the use and function of social differences (Martens 2006; Seidl and Becker 2006). Süß (2007) refers to Gidden’s theory of structuration, addressing the diffusion of diversity programs and practices. Koall (2001, 2002) and also Krell (2003) employ poststructuralist approaches in order to examine for example the reproduction processes of gender relations (Koall 2001, 2002; Krell 2003). Becker (2006) uses the transaction cost-theory, analysing the costs and benefits of diversity initiatives. Only Ortlieb and Sieben (2008) investigate power relations based on exchange of resources using the resource- dependence theory, in order to explain why ethnic minority workers are, or are not employed by organisations. However, multilevel perspective on organisations, which could enhance the understanding of diversity discourses and practices, are not considered until now.
Lastly it is necessary to talk about a further theme, namely managing ethnic diversity, which actually is not one of the themes of significance in the German diversity management literature, making it therefore particularly noteworthy. As mentioned before, diversity management in the German context is not about the elimination of race discrimination, which is clearly reflected in the relevant
100 diversity management literature. As mentioned in previous sections of this thesis, race discrimination is also not a considered issue in the mainstream and the political debate in Germany. Altogether, race discrimination in employment seems to be simply non-existent.
Since organisational practices cannot be viewed as detached from macro context influences, it is rather unsurprising that race related issues are absent in organisational diversity management agendas. Very interesting is a study from Köppel, Yan and Lüdicke (2007), which researched a number of companies regarding their practices of managing ethnic diversity. All researched companies do have diversity management practices; however for the most they do not include race related issues in their diversity management approaches. Among all researched companies only a few MNCs view managing ethnic diversity as pertinent. All other companies still do not see any reason to manage ethnic diversity, even if business reasons could be announced. Companies explain their disinterest in managing ethnic diversity with low numbers of ethnic minority workers. This is rather surprising, considering that Germany is, after Austria and Luxemburg, the country with the highest portion of immigrants in Europe. Therefore this argument seems to be formed upon a false estimation by the organisations. However, neglecting the importance of managing ethnic diversity also indicates that German companies still deny the potential of an ethnic diverse workforce. This implies that the attempted appreciation of differences has not been translated into practice yet.
4.4 Global diversity management
So far, this chapter focused predominantly on domestic perspectives on diversity management approaches and practices. We saw that there are major national variation in the interpretation and practice of diversity management. The same does apply to the interpretation and implementation of equal opportunities laws across different countries (Özbilgin 2002). However, this section concentrates on global diversity management, which stands for an international perspective to managing diversity rather than a domestic one. Besides, the case-study company
101 this study is partially drawing on is a multi-national cooperation, which deploys a global diversity management approach, making it therefore necessary to discuss briefly the notion of global diversity management.
Global Diversity Management is a management philosophy which suggests to plan, coordinate and implement a set of strategies, policies, initiatives, and training and development activities that seek to go beyond national differences in diversity management policies and practices by recognizing and leveraging diverse sets of social and individual backgrounds, interests, beliefs, values and ways of work across branch networks of organisations with international, multinational, global and transnational workforces (Özbilgin and Tatli 2008).
Global diversity management with its international focus is a relatively new issue in the literature concerned with diversity management. In terms of organisational diversity management practices and approaches, the increasing diffusion of global diversity management, particularly amongst US MNC’s can be understood as an answer to the growing impact of globalisation on the workforce of organisations, making an international perspective to diversity management crucial (Wentling and Palma-Rivas 2000). Numerous multi- national corporations have workforces located outside the company’s home country. In its core, global diversity management is thought as a tool relating the management of workforces across different countries (Mor Barak 2005). Global diversity management as a management discipline is similar to domestic diversity management approaches concerned with how a global workforce can be managed effectively attempting to achieve business benefits and competitive advantage. According to Özbilgin (2008) global organisations usually choose to localise, universalize or transversalise their global diversity management strategies. The below figure displays the differences of the three strategies mentioned above.
102
Table 1: The three Strategies of Global Diversity Management Localised Universal Transversal Policy National branch network Global HQ policy Global branch focus policy network/council policy Practice Nationally specific Globally Global policy with prescribed national variation Source: Adopted from Özbilgin, 2008
A localised strategy for global diversity management means that the local plants of an MNC can identify and set out own priorities and methods in managing diversity and that such activities are not coordinated or monitored by the headquarters. As a result the diversity management approach and profile can differ across the branch network. However, such approach should be only utilised in a local context were mechanisms for dealing with diversity issues are established and diversity management is seen as a pertinent key issue for the local management and not in a local context where diversity management is not established yet. On the contrary, the second approach for global diversity management, the universal strategy does not consider regional and national variations in diversity management. Policies and practices of diversity management are standardised throughout a global firm. Both strategies include shortcomings, the first one because it is too focused on the local context and the second one because it does not consider the local context at all. This brings us to the last global diversity strategy, the transversal strategy, which is thought to overcome the shortcomings of the localized and universalized strategies. The transversal strategy adopts a global branch policy approach and a global diversity management practice with national variations. This means that the global approach does consider the local context of its branches (Özbilgin 2008).
In disparity to domestic diversity management approaches, global diversity management is additionally under the influence of the MNCs organisational strategy and local labour as well as product market pressures (Florkowski 1996). Managing a diverse global workforce while sustaining consistency throughout the
103 organisation is seen as the major challenge (Rosenzweig 1998). Yet, Özbilgin and Tatli (2008: xii) argue
… the North-American origins of this concept deem it unsuitable for other national contexts. Therefore, there is a need for context specific frames to understand how diversity management may work across different cultural and economic settings.
Hence, global diversity management initiatives need to be locally significant (Schneider & Barsoux 2003). MNCs have to pay attention to divergent national aspects such as: legislation, languages spoken, religions, ethnicity, labour availability and composition and industrial relations.
4.5 Conclusion
This chapter provided a review of diversity management literature from the USA, the UK and Germany, describing the evolution of the concept of diversity management as well as its notion in the German context. It was shown that the notion of diversity management varies across these countries, particularly when comparing the UK and USA with Germany. It appears that there is no one definitive definition of diversity management (Tomervik 1995). Diversity management is a complex, multidimensional concept as a whole. It is a plural term with different perceptions in different organisations, societies and national cultures without any unitary meaning (Cassell 2001; Özbilgin and Tatli 2008).
For instance, in Germany diversity management is not about the elimination of race discrimination. This is surprising, considering that in recent years diversity management is seen as a possible useful tool to aid the better integration of ethnic minority workers. It could be argued that this idea of integration ethnic minority workers with diversity management is rather unpromising, as it not only dilutes issues such as race discrimination as criticised in the UK and the USA, but also simply neglects such issues in the German context. A further difficulty is the
104 dominance of female native-born scholars and practitioners in the field of diversity management in Germany. Their dominance in the field of diversity management in Germany might explain the absence of an ethnic minority voice in the field. However, I argue that the ethnic minority voice is necessary if one is truly aiming for change in the field of diversity management as well as in targeting the inclusion of ethnic minority workes with diversity management.
The last section of this chapter gave an account to global diversity management. This is particularly relevant as MNC’s increasingly transfer their diversity management strategies to foreign subsidiaries, such as in the case of the case study company examined for this company. In the chapter “The organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany” it is shown that in the case of the company under scrutiny, applying a universal global diversity management approach comes along with a number of shortcomings, such as the violation of legal obligations or the fact that the diversity management priorities picked by the German branch do not comply with the overall global diversity management strategy. It is also shown that it is relevant to consider the local and particularly historical context of a country.
105 Chapter Five
Methodology
5.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the research methodology deployed for this study. The chapter starts with a discussion of the research philosophy informing this study. The research philosophy of this thesis is informed by critical realism and is based upon a multilevel and multilayered analysis of reality (Bourdieu 1992; Layder 1993). Therefore, I first discuss the basic notion of the critical realist approach, which underpins the research philosophy adopted in this research. After this, the conceptual framework adopted in this study is presented. I explain how each research method is utilised in order to enable a relational and multi-level understanding of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. A section follows describing the research design of this study, which includes a description of how I secured research access, an account of the fieldwork and the different methods employed. The chapter then proceeds to describe research methods and process of data analysis. In line with one of the key methodological principles adopted in this research, the chapter concludes with a self-reflexive account of the research process.
5.2 Research philosophy
The research philosophy of this thesis is informed by critical realism and is based upon a multilevel and multilayered analysis of reality (Bourdieu 1994; Layder 1993). This section gives a brief overview of the critical realist principles regarding issues such as epistemology, ontology and methodology. Moreover, issues such as the layered nature of social reality and the dualism of agency versus
106 structure, particularly in their relation to critical realism, are addressed in this section.
Conducting research requires a researcher to develop a strictly defined frame of scientific methods, consisting of different ideas, rules, techniques, and approaches in order to create and evaluate knowledge. Since there is never only one best way to undertake a research project, a researcher has to make choices about the approaches, the strategies and the methods, which are most suitable to the own research project. The starting point in developing this frame is always to think about the own philosophical position of social science, about the research philosophy or research paradigm, which relates to the development of knowledge and the nature of knowledge. Hence, philosophical grounding is the backbone of any research inquiry (Collier 1994). The research paradigm contains important assumptions about the way in which a researcher views the world. There are three major philosophical issues of thinking about a paradigm: ontology, epistemology and methodology.
Ontology’s are theories of reality and about the nature of being (Johnson and Duberley 2000). According to Craig (1998), the word ontology is utilised to consign the philosophical examination of existence, or being. In asking what being means, or what it is for something to exist, such investigation possibly will be directed towards the concept of being. Along with this it may also, or as an alternative, be asking the question of what exists, and/or what general sorts of thing are there? Talking about philosopher’s and also a researcher’s ontology is a common and relevant issue. It displays the sorts of things they take to exist, the ontology of a theory, meaning the things that would have to exist for that theory to be true.
The ontology adopted by critical realism shares different aspects. Critical realism is a socially constructed, process, history and context oriented view and besides that marked by an emancipatory interest of liberation, freedom from domination and autonomy. Following the critical theory, reality can be known but it is a
107 reality shaped by racial and ethnic, gender, social, political, cultural, economic factors (Guba and Lincoln 1994) that create structures of oppression. That is of large importance for my research question, which is related to the topic of racial discrimination. Furthermore, critical theory requires a realist ontology, in which objects exist and exert their influence through a “veil of understanding that is understood through hermeneutic and descriptive methods” (Morris 1999: 1). The realist orientation is an orientation toward social reality that assumes reality has multiple layers and governed by hidden, underlying structures; and that what is observed on surface level does not easily uncover significant structures or causal mechanism at deeper levels.
Furthermore, Bourdieu proposes to utilise a relational approach in studying social phenomena, which suggests broader insights and a deeper understanding for the study of social phenomenon, particularly in comparison to other methods utilised to examine ‘difference’ or ‘diversity’ in social settings (Özbilgin and Vassilopoulou forthcoming). Advocating relational methods he argues:
This formula, which might seem abstract or obscure, states the first conditions for an adequate reading of the analysis of the relation between social positions (a relational concept), dispositions (or habitus), and position-takings (prises de position), that is, the ‘choices’ made by the social agents in the most diverse domains of practice... It is a reminder that comparison is possible only from system to system, and that the search for direct equivalences between features grasped in isolation, whether, appearing at first sight different, they provide to be ‘functionally’ or technically equivalent (like pernod and shochu or sake) or nominally identical (the practice of golf in France and Japan, for instance), risks unduly identifying structurally different properties or wrongly distinguishing structurally identical properties. … what is commonly called distinction, that is, a certain quality of bearing and manners, often considered innate … is nothing other than difference, a gap, a distinctive
108 feature, in short, a relational property existing only in and through its relation with other properties (Bourdieu 1998: 6).
In this regard, surface level observations are not going to bring the sufficient results to understand the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Furthermore, the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity is a product of history, produced by individual and collective practices. On that account, this study considers a relational model between agency and structure and seeks to transcend the objective-subjective divide and secondly, the relational model of micro-meso-macro dimensions, which captures the space, the history of and the interplay between layered social phenomena (Özbilgin and Tatli 2005). Following Syed and Özbilgin (2009: 2449)
The relational framework not only brings together insights from all layers of analysis transcending micro-, meso- and macro-level analysis but also helps question where agency and structures may reside. Moreover, a relational approach may be instrumental in developing a comprehensive understanding of the unique discourses and enactments of diversity management within each society because of its reliance on macro-national and historical contexts in addition to organisational and individual level considerations.
Applying a relational perspective fosters the integration of micro and macro organisational perspectives and provides a framework to study organisational phenomena in “dynamic and processual terms” (Özbilgin and Kyriakidou 2006: 1). Hence, employing a multilevel and multilayered perspective on organisations might enhance the understanding of diversity discourses and practices. In Germany diversity management literature fails to consider layers of society, across time and place. Such an approach offers the possibility to fulfil the obvious need for adequate concepts in the field of theory and research, and politics and management practice (Glastra 1996).
109 While ontology’s are theories concerned with the nature of being, epistemologies are theories of knowledge. Thus, epistemology is concerned with the nature, sources and limits of knowledge.
Epistemology has been primarily concerned with propositional knowledge, that is, knowledge that such-and-such is true, rather than other forms of knowledge, for example, knowledge how to such-and-such. There is a vast array of views about propositional knowledge, but one virtually universal presupposition is that knowledge is true belief, but not mere true belief (Klein 1998 and 2005: 1).
The epistemology adopted by critical realism is claimed to be subjectivist. Researcher and those researched come together with different histories, backgrounds and values. Following the critical theory, everybody’s knowledge is a result of social condition and cannot be understood independently of the social actors, which are involved in the knowledge derivation process. Hence, any findings are value laden and due to the assumptions held by the observer, consequential objective observation is considered to be impossible. It is believed that cognitive interests determine the procedures used to discover and justify knowledge. Moreover, knowledge and the process of generating knowledge has always to be viewed in relation to the historical context, the structures and power dynamics in a society or a particular field (Saunders et al. 2007).
Finally, research methodology, stands for a set of research methods or research strategies deployed to examine a social phenomena. Issues such as ontology, epistemology and methodology determine how the research should be undertaken. There is a range of philosophical assumptions upon which research can be based, which are including different implications for the chosen methods. As a result, the field of social science is characterised by unsettled and unresolved quarrels on interrelated questions of ontology, epistemology and methodology. In terms of methodology, critical realism accepts methodological pluralism, rather than a fixed set of research methods or research strategies. Its compability with different
110 types of research methods makes critical realism a relatively open research philosophy (Scheuer 2001), which offers the researcher the possibility of combining different research methods compatible with the subject under study. In the next section I introduce the conceptual framework adopted for this study and explain how the multilevel and multilayered perspective, informed by critical realism and the work of Bourdieu, is utilised for this study.
5.3 Research design
This section engages with the research framework adopted in this study. I firstly explain briefly how each research method is utilised in order to enable a relational and multi-level understanding of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. This is followed by a more detailed explanation of each phase of the research project, starting with the literature review, the process of securing research access and finally the data collection, which illustrates the methods utilised for this research project.
5.3.1 Research framework
A research design is the framework that specifies the type of information to be collected, the sources of the data, and the data-collection procedures. This study employs a relational analytical framework from a contextual and multilevel perspective, embedding both agency and structure, which I adopted from Bourdieu (1994, 1998) and critical realist scholar Layder (1993). Furthermore, Bourdieu’s core concepts of field, habitus and symbolic violence are used to elaborate the three layers of social reality of organisations, attempting to clarify different analytical and methodological levels of investigation. The use of the concepts for the purpose of operationalising micro, meso and micro levels of investigation is summarised in Table 1. In order to explain the conceptual framework of my study, in the following the core concepts of Bourdieu´s approach, related to the three layers of society and the therefore employed methods are outlined.
111 Table 2: Conceptual framework Research question Levels of Data sources Theoretical analysis frame How does the larger historical context Macro. Stakeholder interviews, History manifest in the organisational habitus of Meso and documentary data, (Layder) managing ethnic diversity in Germany and Micro observations Field in the agency of diversity management Habitus stakeholders? How does symbolic violence manifest in the Macro. Case study, stakeholder Symbolic organisational habitus of managing ethnic Meso and interviews, grey violence diversity in Germany and in the agency of Micro literature, company Habitus diversity management stakeholders? level data, visual data, observations What is the nature of the relationship Macro, Stakeholder interviews, Field between the notion of integration and Meso and documentary data, case Habitus diversity management in Germany? Micro study, observations Symbolic violence
For the macro-level Bourdieu`s theoretical concept field is operationalised, standing for the widespread field of society. The concept field is explaining the environment as the rules “objective structures” within class struggles are taking place and includes the pertaining social dynamics, influences “social and industrial regulations, legislation, social norms, values and culture” and power relations (Bourdieu 1990). Jenkins (1992: 85) defines field as
… a structured system of social positions-occupied either by individuals or institutions- the nature of which defines the situation for their occupants. It is also a system of forces, which exist between these positions; a field is structured internally in terms of power relations.
Hence, the notion of field brings the objective structures into the analysis of any social phenomenon (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992). In this study, the examination of the field is based on semi-structured interviews with relevant stakeholder (scholars, politicians, policy-makers, trade unionists, etc.) of the field and documentary data.
Furthermore, a field structures the social settings of organisations in which habitus operates, a strategy which is “generating principle enabling agents to cope with unforeseen and ever-changing situations” (Bourdieu 1977: 72). In this
112 notion, habitus denotes the organisational culture and organisational memory (meso-level) that governs the conduct of action and interaction in the organisation (Mahar et al. 1990), and shapes individual and collective response to the present and future and mediates the effects of external structures to produce action (Swartz 1997: 69). Hence, the concept of habitus brings into the subjective dimension of human agency into the analysis (Grenfell and James 1998: 15) and functions thereby as a bridge between structure and agency. This study employs a single company case study, semi-structured stakeholder interviews, grey literature, company data and visual data in order to investigate the organisational level.
The subjective dimension of human agency constitutes the micro-level. Individuals are positioned in the field and use different strategies to enhance and secure their power position within the field. The driving force behind the strategies is “the encounter of habitus with the peculiar conjuncture of the field” (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992: 129). For Bourdieu, strategy does not mean conscious, individual, rational choice, rather, strategy refers to appropriate actions taken without conscious based on habitus, “a system of lasting and transposable dispositions which, integrating past experiences, functions at every moments as a matrix of perceptions, appreciations and actions” (Bourdieu 1977: 95). According to Nash (2002) dispositions are acquired personal states and beliefs, which are conceived as habits. In order to display the micro-level of this study the case study and stakeholder interviews are used.
A further theoretical frame utilised to elaborate the three layers of social reality of organisations is the Bourdieuan concept of symbolic violence. Bourdieu introduced the notion of symbolic violence attempting to understand social reproduction through cultural mechanisms: “symbolic violence, to put it as tersely and simply as possible, is the violence which is exercised upon a social agent with his or her complicity” (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992: 167). Symbolic violence is defined as a partly unconscious instrument of domination and an imposing system of symbolism and meaning, for example in thought and perception, upon
113 subordinated groups or classes in order to secure the social reproduction of relations of domination (Jenkins 1992; Bourdieu 1994). For instance, gender domination and also the construction of gender itself represents one field of symbolic violence (Bourdieu 2001). Symbolic power is according to Bourdieu (1984: 23) utilised “to conserve or to transform current classifications in matters of gender, nation, religion, age and social status, and this through the words used to designate or to describe individuals, groups or institutions.” As such, symbolic violence takes place in such a way that for instance exclusion and inclusion are naturalised and experienced as legitimate. This legitimacy shadows the existing power relations and makes them often unrecognisable to, and invisible to individuals who experience them. Jenkins (1992:105) argued, “the mainstay of the exercise of symbolic violence is pedagogic action … (and this) involves the exclusion of ideas as unthinkable, as well as their positive inculcation.” Thereby, individuals consent to the dominant values and the behavioural schema currently utilised in the field (Kim 2004). Moreover, the internalised violence manifests within the self-consciousness of individuals as well as a shared habitus (Jenkins 1992; Bourdieu 1992).
Symbolic violence, particularly linguistic symbolic violence, manifests in daily interactions of individuals as well as in interactions between individuals in institutional settings as part of their shared habitus (Bourdieu 1977, 1992). Through such practice order and restraint are embodied, established and maintained through indirect linguistic symbolic violence. According to Wittengenstein, language is an agreed way of speaking and carrying out activities, rather than a reflection of reality (Astley and Zammuto 1992; Mauws and Phillips 1995). However, language is not only an agreed way of speaking, but also a subtle instrument of control, which “provides and sanctions legitimate forms of discourse and language and thus serves as a mechanism of knowledge that produces new understandings of the organisation” (Oakes at al. 1998: 258). Moreover, opposite concepts get excluded from the legitimate organisational discourse, which leads to the reproduction of organisational culture. Organisations are maintained through symbolic modes such as language that facilitates shared
114 meanings and shared realities (Smircich 1983). Bourdieu (1984) indentified the power to nominate or the monopoly of legitimate naming. Each field is marked by a struggle over legitimate naming (Bourdieu and Passeron 1977; Bourdieu 1992). He noted, “the social world can be uttered and constructed, according to different principles of vision and division” (Bourdieu 1984: 726). According to Konecki (2006:3)
Symbolic violence enters the organisational life imperceptibly, and its agents (scientists, consultants, managers) pass on the structure of this discourse inconspicuously and often unconsciously.
Additionally, symbolic violence can materialize itself in form of a shared habitus, which shapes not only individual behaviour but also influences organisational settings. The salient point is that this happens mostly without the conscious realisations of the involved actors. Clearly, the internally related concepts of habitus, symbolic violence and field have implications for organisational and individual practices. The constitution of a field is of particular concern for members in a field for different reasons. A field structures not only the social settings of organisations, but also provides the setting in which habitus operates. The habitus of indvidual actors is constraint by deeply internalized aspects of identity such as gender, race, ethnicity and class that individuals bring into a field (Bourdieu 1990). Such identities are preserved through the distribution of positions and capital within a field. Moreover, the internally related concepts of field, habitus and symbolic violence inform management. They provide individuals with a vocabulary of motives and a sense of identity and generate values and prevailing concepts of organisational work and worth.
In addition to above outlined theoretical concepts, this study deploys Layder’s (1993) ‘research map’ in order to understand the interplay between layers of social reality at micro, meso and macro levels. The research map is particularly useful as it not only considers time and space, but also acknowledges the importance to consider social and historical contexts attempting to understand
115 social phenomena. The map consists of four different layers the context, the setting, situated activity and lastly the self.
Table 3: Layder’s Research Map H Research element Research focus I Context Macro social forms (e.g. class, gender, ethnic relations) S Setting Immediate environment of social activity (schools, family, T factory) O Situated Activity Dynamics of face-to-face interaction R Self Biographical experience and social involvements Y Source: Layder 1993: 8
The above table illustrates Layder’s research map, outlining all proposed four layers of analysis and additionally the dimension of history. Layder argues that there are no boundaries between the different elements of the research map; all elements overlap and interweave with each other. For instance the features history and power need to be considered in analysing social activity as they influence behaviour and social activity in general. Thereby history, represents the temporal dimension through which all the other elements move, or as Layder (1993: 101) notes
The important feature that needs to be highlighted at this juncture is the idea that all elements of the map have their own distinctive emphases in relation to time. That is to say, self, situated activity, setting and context, as social processes, represent both different time-scales and units of change.
According to Layder the dimension of history is of vast importance if one attempts to understand a social phenomena. Focussing on the larger historical context as well as on historical dynamics, in order to answer a research question can provide an answer to how a particular feature of social life evolved in its current form. It can also enhance the understanding regarding changes, as all
116 social production and transformation takes place only under certain conditions inherited from the past.
The first layer outlined in the above table refers to the macro context of social activity. According to Layder (1993), class, gender and ethnic relations are the main macro elements used in sociological analysis. For instance he argues
… the macro dimension of these factors concentrates the fieldworker’s attention to the large-scale, society-wide distribution of recourses in relation to the social group that happens to be the focus of analysis. Such resources can be understood in terms of the allocation of material goods and services as well as of status, authority and power (Layder 1993: 99).
Deploying Layder’s research map for this PhD project provides the opportunity to analyse ethnic groups for instance in terms of their power resources. Considering power relations as part of the wider economic and social conditions is crucial in order to understand the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. However, according to Layder, it is not only power which should be considered when examining the macro context of a social phenomenon. Macro features such as culture and elements such as values and norms, codes of behaviour and linguistic forms constituting societies and their subsectors are of equal importance. For instance, chapter six of this thesis, titled symbolic violence, examines linguistic forms of symbolic violence, which are found to have a major influence on the current constitution of the diversity management agenda in Germany.
The second element of the research map denotes the setting of the social phenomenon under investigation. Social setting as a layer of analysis stands for the immediate environment of social activity, such as for example organisations in general, a school, a company or the family. For instance, social activity tends to be limited to specific settings and individuals. The social setting
117 … represents the already established character of social forms that have been produced and reproduced in the past. As such, these reproduced relations entail forms of power and authority, which decisively influence social activity in these settings … (Layder 1993: 91).
The authority structure of an institution or organisation has a significant impact on the patterns of interaction within them. Moreover, Layder emphasises the importance to understand power and control the way they operate in social settings, since these aspects do determine social activity to a certain degree. Examining for example a company, as this PhD study does, as a social setting and considering power relations, can aid the understanding of existing race relations in this company as a direct consequence of the wider context of race relations.
A further potential area of research in exploratory fieldwork is the level of situated activity. According to Layder (1993: 80)
The area of situated activity shifts focus away from the individual’s response to various kinds of social situations towards a concern with the dynamics of interaction itself. This concern with the dynamics of interaction stresses the way in which gatherings of, or encounters between, several individuals tend to produce outcomes and properties that are result of the interchange of communication between the whole group rather than the behaviour of the constituent individuals viewed singly.
In other words the analysis of the area of social activity allows us to understand recurrent and general patterns of social interaction, rather than specific aspects of situations as well as the collective intentions and objectives regarding the notion of integration in Germany.
The last level in this research map is the element of the self, which gives account to the self-identity and the social experience of an individual.
118 The notion of self points to an individual’s sense of identity, personality and perception of the social world as these things are influenced by her or his social experience (Layder 1993: 74).
This element denotes the micro level of analysis and directs attention to how individuals respond to, and are influenced by their own social experience. It also refers to the individual’s relation to the social environment, which is characterised by biographical experience and social involvement.
Layder´s research map provides a useful framework for this study. It can enhance the understanding of how micro, meso and macro phenomena influence behaviour and social activities. The interrelationships between these layers of activity are then located in their respective historical context. Thereby, macro, meso and micro layers are not independent of one another; rather they exist in state of relational interdependence. In particular, considering time and space pays tribute to Bourdieu’s notion viewing field and habitus not as static constructs (Özbilgin and Tatli 2005).
5.3.2 Literature review
A first literature review has been conducted in the early phase of the research project. Reviewing relevant literature has been of vital importance particularly during the first phase of my research project in order to refine the focus of the research. Thereby, the reading of international literature concerned with diversity management and equal opportunities at work initially received particular attention, since I had already covered most relevant literature for the German case in the course of my previous research activities in the field of diversity management in Germany. The initial literature review was then constantly updated throughout the research process. Hence, the reading of new publications was an important part of the whole research period including the final phases of writing up. Moreover, emerging topics during the field study made reading of additional literature necessary. Research questions and also research objectives not only emerged during and in the course of the extensive literature review, but
119 also became gradually clarified and refined in this process. Moreover, the literature review played an important role in the evolvement of the research philosophy and methodology of this study.
5.3.3 Data collection
This section illustrates the data collection process for this research project. The section consists of six parts and starts with describing the process of gaining research access. This includes a brief discussion of the relevance considering power relations when aiming to secure research access as a researcher. After narrating the process of securing research access, I describe the research methods utilised in the fieldwork such as the semi-structured stakeholder interviews, documentary review, observations, the collection of visual data and lastly, the single company case study.
5.3.3.1 Research access
This section describes the process of securing research access. Obtaining research access for the stakeholder interviews and the company case study did not happen in a chronological or sequential order. However, in order to provide a structured description, I describe this process in two steps. The first step, explains how I secured access for the semi-structured interviews with thirty stakeholders in the field of diversity management. In the second step I provide a description of how I secured research access to the single company case study.
Obtaining access for the stakeholder interviews has been compared to getting access to a company for the case study a rather unproblematic task. In order to contact interviewees and get appointment for the interviews I made several telephone calls and exchanged e-mails. All of the contacted possible participants received an e-mail including a letter of request, explaining the aim of the study as well as giving information regarding my person.
120 The circumstance that I worked in the field of diversity management and equality in Germany before starting my research project put me in a favourable position in terms of accessing interview participants for the stakeholder interviews. I was able to draw on contacts that I made by working in the German field of diversity management and equality. Some of the interviewees I knew personally before interviewing them and some were even colleagues, which made it easy to approach them. Additionally, most participants were very helpful in providing me with further possible participants and contacts. Using the snowball technique, I was then able to access a broader pool of possible interviewees. In cases where I was not able to get access on my own, I used again personal contacts. For instance, a befriended politician contacted several for this study relevant politicians as well as governmental institutions. It would have been nearly impossible to get access to this people without his assistance, as previous attempts contacting them were unsuccessful. A further difficulty was getting access to the Federal Anti-discrimination Agency. I had to exchange a large number of e-mails and phone calls until I was granted the permission to interview one member of staff. However, the permission was only granted under the condition not to cite the interview.
As mentioned above, securing research access to a company for the case study has been a more difficult task compared to securing access for the semi-structured interviews. The same as for the stakeholder interviews, I started contacting suitable companies in e-mailing them a letter of request and making several phone calls. After contacting a large number of companies and not receiving any feedback in most cases, I realised that it is difficult to secure access on my own. Drawing again on my contacts, I contacted the diversity manager of one of the leading companies in terms of diversity management in Germany. While she refused my initial request of conducting the study in her company, she offered me as an alternative to contact one of the most prominent diversity consultancies in Germany. As this company is one of their major clients, she was confident that the manager of this consultancy would agree on helping in finding a suitable company for my case study. Ironically I already had contacted this consultant
121 asking him for help, but he had refused my request. However, after telling her this, she contacted this person for me and as a result he contacted 125 companies (all his clients) for me, asking them to grant me access and sending them my letter of request.
This experience shows how important it is to consider power relations when aiming to secure research access as a researcher. For instance Saunders et al. (2007: 181) argues, “Organisational gatekeepers are in a very powerful position in relation to researchers who request organisational access”. It seems that I would not have been able to secure access on my own, without using such powerful contacts. Unsurprisingly most of the companies responded to my new request sent through the consultancy. However, only one company actually gave me access to conduct my study at the end. The sensitive topic of my study, in particular the fact that I attempted to investigate race related issues in the context of organisations, might explain this unwillingness. However, considering the sensitive topic under scrutiny, securing one company for my study can be viewed as a major success in the German context. The process of securing access to a company for the case study took a little more than two month, from September 2008 to November 2008, when I received the permission of one company to conduct my study.
5.3.3.2 Fieldwork
This study employs multiple sources of data: secondary data in the form of scholarly and practitioner literature overview, semi-structured interviews with stakeholders, and a single company case study. The intention of using various methods is not only to reduce the limitations of every single method, but also to increase the reliability and validity of the findings through triangulation. Triangulation thereby cannot be understood as a tool or strategy of validation, but at least as an alternative to it. For instance, Layder (1998: 51) advocates a multi- strategy framework:
… social research should employ as many data collection techniques as possible in order to maximise its ability to tap into all social domains in
122 depth” and he advocates “a multi-strategy framework … in order to tease out the multi- layered nature of social life.
Critical realism suggests that different research methods might be helpful in examining different layers of social reality. Moreover, the subject investigated should inform the research questions, as well as the choice of research methods (Brown et al. 2001; Sayer 2000). In the case of this study, using different methods allowed the research questions to be explained at macro, meso and micro levels. For instance, evidence from interviews with stakeholder in the field of diversity management were vital in edifying the macro level dynamics, which draw not only the frame for organisational managing ethnic diversity approaches, but also influence the agency of diversity management stakeholder. Based on the company case study, it has been possible to identify the characteristics of organisational diversity management approaches in the German context. Lastly, in analysing the stakeholder interviews and the company case study, this study provides an understanding of the diversity management field in Germany. The following sections explain all methods deployed in this study.
5.3.3.3 Stakeholder interviews
Starting the fieldwork, a pilot study has been carried out to adjust the interview guide. I amended the interview schedule in line with issues raised by my doctoral supervisors and feedback given during the pilot interviews. Furthermore, I revised the interview guide during the fieldwork, when I identified such a necessity throughout the interviews. Thirty interviews with German stakeholders have been carried out in total. Similar studies on equality and diversity actors also include interviews with a maximum of thirty participants (Özbilgin and Tatli 2007; Kirton and Greene 2006). The thirty participants, who are equality and diversity actors, are coming from different sub-fields of the diversity management field in Germany. Ten out of the fifteen minority ethnic participants are people of Turkish ethnicity. The other fifteen are native-born Germans. This provides an ethnic minority perspective, which certainly is not frequently considered in German equality and diversity research. Most stakeholder interviews were face-to-face
123 interviews. For that I travelled three times to Germany, staying for a minimum of two weeks each time. This made it possible to conduct a number of interviews each time, which were all, scheduled and organised from the UK beforehand. Only two interviews, in both cases it has not been possible to arrange face-to-face interviews, were carried out via Skype videoconference. All interviews have been recorded, archived and transcribed verbatim. The interview language was German. While I translated the interview guide into English, the translation of the interviews consists only for the analysis of relevant parts. The following table provides information of the stakeholder interviewed for this study.
Table 4: Demographic profile of diversity and equality stakeholders Pseudonym Job description Sex Ethnicity Age Associate of a trade union, diversity Male German Young Michael trainer and consultant. Previously: adult - Member PR department of the lower house of parliament. Responsible for issues such as integration politics and anti- discrimination. - Member PR department of the federal ministry for family, woman, seniors and youth. Worked on the development of the German equal treatment law Elke Researcher, lecturer, Trainer Female German Middle aged Werner Consultant and diversity trainer Male German Young adult Peter Head of anti-racism NGO Male German Young adult Takuya Researcher, lecturer and diversity Male Japanese Middle trainer aged Irene Researcher, lecturer, trainer, Female German Old age consultant Gülseren Municipal Integration Delegate Female Turkish Middle aged Jasmin Head of a Mentoring program for Female Afghan Young females with migration background adult Sabine Referentin ADS Female German Middle aged Zoe Member of a diversity management Female Mixed Young unit at a University black adult Mustafa Member of governmental Male Turkish Young department, responsible for ethnic adult minority issues
124 Ingeborg University Professor of intercultural Female German Old age pedagogy and researcher on structural race discrimination of young people in education and work for the last thirty years Murat Researcher, lecturer, politician Green Male Turkish Young party adult Özlem Head of antidiscrimination office Female Turkish Young NGO adult Ricardo Member of trade union, project Male Spanish Middle manager of the unit integration of aged people with migration background into the labour market Cem Head of a research team in a Male Turkish Old age Research centre concerned with race related issues Brigitte Researcher, University lecturer, Female German Middle diversity trainer. Owner of an aged research institute and consultancy (main focus on ethnicity) Ali Associate of welfare organisation, Male Turkish Middle integration and migration unit. aged Politician SPD, one of the first candidates of Turkish ethnicity Nicole Lawyer, labour law specialist Female German Middle aged Turgut Head of federal integration advisory Male Turkish Old age board and teacher Tanja Member of Federal ministry, head of Female German Middle federal fraction of the SPD and aged responsible for integration and migration issues Gülderen Associate of federal chamber of Female Turkish Young commerce, head of a project adult concerned with ethnic minority chamber members
Thorsten Associate of a relevant research Male German Middle institute, focused on ethnic minority aged Turks Tina Associate of a trade union Female German Middle aged
John Academic, diversity trainer and board Male American Old age member of two networks, one for diversity management and one for intercultural matters Eleni Editor of a online platform for Female Greek Middle diversity management of a political aged foundation Betty Academic and head of a NGO and Female American Old age
125 Diversity Management foundation Erkan Head of a research centre concerned Male Turkish Young with ethnic minority issues and adult lawyer Cengiz Founder of a online Journal Male Turkish Young concerned with ethnic minority issues adult Silvia Diversity and intercultural Trainer Female German Middle and founder of a online Diversity aged Management Group
The interview guide covers a list of questions of fairly specific topics, but the framework is quite open. This allowed, in contrast to a fully structured interview, to ask questions, which are not included in the guide, so that relevant topics can be initially identified such as possible relationships between the topics and issues. Through this method things said by interviewees can be picked up and become the basis for more specific questions, which do not need to be prepared in advance. The interview questions were not always addressed in the same order indicated in the interview schedule. For instance, participants sometimes answered questions before I asked them, or I aked questions where they fitted in the course of the interview. Nevertheless, by and large, all of the questions from the interview guide have been asked and a similar wording was used from interviewee to interviewee (Bryman 2004: 320-321). The participants became by that an active role in the interview situation and a participation of their own everyday experiences is more accessible. Given the relatively open interview framework, various key themes emerged from the interviews.
The themes and questions in the interview schedule are informed by the conceptual framework, which is provided and explained in this chapter as well, and by knowledge gaps identified in the relevant literature. Preparing the questions I started by looking at interview questions used in prior academic investigations related to my own. One aim of conducting these interviews was to gain deeper insights about the field of diversity management in Germany, such as for example national and discourse and scholarly discourse effects, on organisational approaches concerned with the management of ethnic diversity in German organisations and to uncover and understand key influences. In order to explore the field of diversity management in Germany, the interview schedule
126 consits of questions that give an understanding of the model of diversity management in the German context. Additionally anticipated insights were releated to issues of race equality and the management of ethnic diversity in organisations in Germany. Further questions were designed in order to explore national drivers, barriers and forces of resistance against the management of ethnic diversity.
The second aim was to explore the agency of diversity management stakeholders, which accounts to the micro level of this study. One key theme in the interview guide is how decision and opinion leaders influence managing diversity in Germany. This theme relates to the issue of power relations in the field of diversity management in Germany. The last part of the interview schedule considers background information of the participants, such as ethnicity, place of birth, sex and job position. These are very important information, as they give an account of the profile of diversity management stakeholder in Germany.
5.3.3.4 Documentary review and observations
Lincoln and Guba (1985) advocate documentary review and observations as central sources to triangulate interview data. According to the widely established definition, triangulation is the use of multiple methods in the study of the same object (Denzin 1978; Richardson 2003; Bryman 2004). Documentary analysis includes an extensive range of sources, with for example official statistics, texts, and visual data such as photographs (May 2001). Documents such as newspapers, books, articles, magazines and governmental reports can be analysed by the social researcher (Bryman 2004). This study includes documentary review and observations, in addition to the thirty stakeholder interviews and the company case study conducted for this research project. The analysis of a wide range of grey literature in form of books, articles, research reports and governmental and European Union reports presented a vital source attempting to gain a deeper understanding of the research topic. With reference to the research topic under scrutiny here, also print media such as newspapers and magazines and online newspapers and magazines have been considered very important because of the
127 centrality of the media to the broader aspects of this dissertation. Using such a method allows one to learn about society and allows hence for contextualization.
Furthermore, this research includes an extensive documentary analysis of the grey literature of the case study company. Important documentary evidence has been collected and reviewed, such as: company information about the company’s history, diversity policies, descriptions of diversity activities, annual reports and brochures and employee statistics. Being able to collect this data enhanced the understanding of the diversity management approach and practice in this company. Hence, the collection and review of grey literature has been a valuable part of the field research.
Lastly, this study includes a number of observations. Within the critical realist tradition researcher attempts to uncover the underlying mechanisms or structures that produce the phenomena under study. In order to identify such underlying mechanisms or structures of social phenomena it is crucial to employ observation as a method. Observations can assist in getting an in-depth understanding of the phenomena, in uncovering aspects not known beforehand or previously not thought of (Neergaard and Ulhoi 2007). For instance, participant observation can assist in discovering meanings that people attach to their actions (Saunders et al. 2007).
Keeping a research diary in order to aid the reflexivity of the research project, I tried to take notes right after each interview. This has not always been possible as some interviews were carried out under the pressure of a tight schedule. However, whenever possible I took immediate notes and if not possible I was doing so at a later time. In the first step I was describing the setting the interview took place. This has been done for different reason. First of all, the setting has an influence on the interview itself. For instance, it is very different conducting an interview at the workplace of a person or in a public place. Some interviews were conducted at the workplace, others were conducted at the home of the participant or in public places such as coffee places. Interviews conducted in public places suffered from
128 immense background sounds at times, making it more difficult to hold the interview.
Besides comments on the setting of the interview, notes were taken on interviewee and researcher behaviour during interview. Doing this has been a valuable tool, as the behaviour of interviewees and my interaction with them sometimes revealed more information about my research questions. For instance, questioning race related issues generated a huge resistance on side of some participants, which has been reflected in the behaviour during the interview. Hence, observing such behaviour and writing down reflective comments on the interviews aided a better understanding of the research questions. Observations took place during the stakeholder interviews, as well as during the company case study.
Additionally, a public migrant representative podiums discussion has been recorded and observed (see below table for participant information).
Table 5: Demographic profile of migrant representatives of the observed plenary discussion Pseudonym Job description Sex Ethnicity Age
Ayse Member of stuff federal unit Female Turkish Young adult integration and migration Mustafa Member Ministry of School Male Turkish Young adult Head of Turkish academic Male Turkish Young adult Network Ali Member CDU, responsible for Male Turkish Middle aged diversity management unit Emre Academic Male Turkish Middle aged Turgut Head of federal integration Male Turkish Old age advisory board and teacher.
Observing a plenary discussion of migrant representatives has been of huge importance for this research project, as it fed into the understanding of the ethnic minority view concerned with race related issues. However, at times it has been challenging for me to remain non-participating, but observing my own behaviour
129 and reflecting on it was of great help. More attention is paid to this issue in a later section on this thesis, concerned with reflexivity in the research process.
5.3.3.5 Visual data
Although qualitative research takes place in a visible world, employing visual data for a research project is considered only rarely in methodological literature (Albrecht 1985; Brannen 2002). Collecting visual data in form of pictures enables to capture the visual dimensions of social life. Emmison and Smith (2000: ix) define visual inquiry as “the study of the seen and observable”. They argue that social life is visual in diverse and counterintuitive ways. For them visual data are not only photographs, advertisements and television programmes, but also material objects such as buildings, clothing, body language and uses of space. Moreover, for Bourdieu, “… structures of social space . . . are inscribed in physical space… ” (2002: 124).
Having this in mind, pictures were taken visualising for example buildings where stakeholder interviews took place. There were enormous differences in the quality and standard of for example buildings inhabited by NGOs and diversity management consultancies or trade unions (outside as well as inside). According to Bourdieu, “Structures of social space show up in spatial opposition” (2002: 125) and furniture and furnishings orientates and defines us in relation to the wider society (Bourdieu 2000). Some of the photographed offices spoke clearly of the power hold by these organisations. The fitments in the different offices symbolised and reflected the position of these different organisations inhabit in the field of diversity management in Germany. According to Bourdieu, “Social relations objectified in familiar objects . . . impress themselves through bodily experiences” (2000: 77).
Visual data clearly enriches the understanding of a social phenomenon. Allatt and Dixon (2004: 80) argue
130 … to use our eyes in the peripheral as well as the central data gathering stages, and to glean data from what is incidentally noticed as well as harvested with specific visual tools, generate an extended sociological understanding. The visual widens the window on the world of those being studied, bringing the intricacies of their life’s closer to both researcher and audience.
This study deployed visual data in the form of photographs in the scope of the stakeholder interviews and the company case study. Pictures were taken from outside buildings as well inside offices. Only photographs taken in the company include people. However, permission was not granted for printing or showing any of these pictures, neither by the stakeholders nor by the case study company. Pictures can bring increased attention to a place where research took place, and some of this attention might be not welcome. How readers will view research reports is difficult to predict because “audiences do not always share sociologists agendas” (Crow 2005: 187). Nonetheless, this material informs the analysis of this thesis, even though these pictures are not visually presented. It is clearly indicated in the text, each time visual data was utilised.
5.3.3.6 Company case study
Case study as a research method is increasingly acknowledged in the area of organisation theory and management. The most known advocate of the case study approach is Yin (1994, 1984), among other scholars (Stake 1995; Hamel, J. 1993; Ragin and Becker 1992; Eisenhardt 1989, 1991), which also contributed to the evolution of the case study approach in the research methods literature. In the core, the case study approach aims at studying one case or a small number of cases in-depth, using suitable methods (Easterby-Smith et al. 2002; Punch 1988). To achieve deeper insights on the meso-relational organisational level this thesis contains a single case study. Similar studies on diversity management in organisations also utilised single company case studies (Frohnen 2005; Tsogas and Subeliani 2005; Bamford and Gay 2007).
131 Yin (1984) suggests single case studies as suitable if the research subject is a previously un-researched topic. The case study method was chosen not because of an interest in one particular case. The intention was that by using this method a deeper contextually understanding of the given research topic into a specific social setting could be achieved (Flyvberg 2006). Hence, the particular case is thereby of secondary interest. Stake (1995) for example, calls this approach an “instrumental” case study, where a single case is used to mainly provide insights into an issue or to redraw generalization. Generally, the case study approach can be characterised as empirical method, which examines
… a contemporary phenomenon within its real life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of evidence are used (Yin 1984: 23).
The case study is based on multiple methods. The collection of multiple data is useful to strengthen the grounding of theory by triangulation of evidence (Eisenhardt 1989: 533). This case study deploys various methods, such as: observations, interviews with key internal stuff as well as employees, a focus group, documentary analysis of company data (policies, annual reports, brochures, as well as employee statistics), information about company history and lastly visual data in form of pictures. The employment of a multiple methods approach in a single study can be best understood as a strategy that inserts complexity, richness, breadth, rigor and which is from huge importance depth to any inquiry (Flick 1998: 230-231). Additionally, triangulation provides clarifying meaning through the identification of different ways the phenomenon is being seen (Silvermann 1993; Flick 1998).
The case study took place in Germany over two weeks. During this time, twelve face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted, which lasted between 30 to 90 min. Three different groups were interviewed, which are managers, members of the Human Resources department and employees, using three different interview guides (see appendix II, III and IV). The interview guides were
132 designed to examine a number of themes, aiming to understand the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in the examined company. These themes are the organisational culture and climate, diversity and equality in the organisation and employee attitude towards diversity management. Additionally themes covered by the three different interview schedules are accounted to the Employment story of the interview participants, examining career as an experience (Layder 1993), and themes such as Education and Training and everyday life, which give information about the cultural and social capital held by the participants (Bourdieu 1977, 1986, 1990, 1991). The last section of each interview guide collects background information of the participants, such as age, gender and ethnicity.
The interviewed participants were four members of the human recourses team, four managers from different areas of the company and lastly, four employees. The table below provides more detailed information of the interview participants.
Table 6: Demographic profile of interview participants from the case study company Pseudonym Job description Sex Ethnicity Age
1 Head of HR department Male German Middle aged 2 HR advisor, Compensation and Female German Middle aged Benefits 3 HR adviser and member of work Female German Middle aged committee 4 HR advisor Male German Middle aged 5 Public Relations Manager Female German Middle aged 6 Sales Manager Male German Middle aged 7 Project Manager Male German Middle aged 8 Marketing Manager Male German Middle aged 9 Employee Male Turkish Middle aged 10 Employee Female Iranian Middle aged 11 Employee Male Nigeria Middle aged 12 Employee Male German Middle aged
Strikingly, all interviewed members of the human recourses team as well as all interviewed managers are native-born German. Only three of all interviewees are non- German nationals, which besides is not a simple coincidence. The company’s contact person (which besides is a member of the human recourses
133 team) deliberately chose the employees for my interviews. I was not allowed to choose interview participants on my own. As a result the interviews with these hand picked employees have to be described as rather awkward. Not being anonymous, the interviewees answered the questions very carefully and one participant (employee number 11) even showed hefty signs of nervousness. Additionally, the contact person as well as the head of the human recourses team repeatedly asked me about what the participants had said. I refused answering these questions, reminding them that the interview outcomes have to be kept anonymous.
A further method deployed for this study is a focus group. All members of the human recourses team participated in the focus group. A discussion was carried out focussing on the three research questions of this study. The table below outlines who participated in the focus group and gives demographic information of the participants.
Table 7: Demographic profile of focus group participants from the case study company Pseudonym Job description Sex Ethnicity Age
1 Head of HR department Male German Middle aged 2 HR advisor, Compensation and Female German Middle aged Benefits 3 HR advisor and member of work Female German Middle aged committee 4 HR advisor Female German Middle aged 5 HR advisor Male German Middle aged 6 HR advisor Male German Middle aged 7 HR advisor Male German Middle aged 8 HR advisor Male German Middle aged
The contact person was very cooperative, providing me company data for the documentary analysis. Access to the intranet of the company was provided, making it possible to retrieve all relevant data for this study, such as company information about the company history, diversity policies, descriptions of diversity activities, annual reports and brochures. Additionally employee statistics were provided, giving information about the composition of the workforce of the five German plants.
134 Lastly, the company’s name is not disclosed in this study. At the beginning of the case study, the for this project responsible company’s contact person made clear that the company should only be revealed in case that the outcomes of the study are positive, which indicates an uncertainty regarding the company’s diversity management approach. However, it seems that the company realised in the course of the study that the study outcomes might not be as expected. In this regard, it was decided that the company should be kept anonymous.
5.4 Data analysis
The data analysis overlapped with the data collection. This approach allowed me to take the advantage of flexible data collection and left freedom to make adjustments during the data collection and the theory-building process (see Eisenhardt 1989: 539). The main part of the qualitative analysis of the material is formed by the coding process, i.e. interpreting the analysed text and attributing the meaning of key words, notions and codes to its individual parts (Charmaz 2006; Bryman 2004; Flick 1998) respectively. Qualitative analysis of the material starts with defining the coding units, followed by the appropriate phenomena records according to our judgment and analysing the characteristics of these phenomena, and ends with the development of the grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss 1967).
On the first level of abstraction open coding was conceptualised in margin of the field notes and first transcripts of the stakeholder interviews. Initially, I was interested in how the scholarly and also public debate of racial discrimination is shaped. Therefore I assigned the code “racial discrimination” and also “discrimination”. One theme that emerged in this study, and which is described in more detail in the analysis section of this thesis, is the influence of the Nazi-past on the diversity management discourse as the practice in Germany. After I located this theme I assigned it with the initial code “Nazi-past”. While coding more data, the emerged concepts were compared and merged into new concepts, and renamed and modified (Glaser 1998). The coding and tabulating of the interview data took place under the use of the Nvivo program. All other collected data
135 resulting from the case study were coded and tabulated as well. The data analysis, collection, and storage as well as all interactions with research participants were undertaken considering the UEA ethics policy and under assurance of anonymity and confidentiality.
5.5 Issues of reflexivity
This section consists of two parts. The first part offers an explanation of the concept of reflexivity. The second part aims to provide a description of my personal background and a self-reflexive account of the research process in describing the impact of my dispositions as a researcher on the research process. According to Jemielniak and Kostera (2010) particularly worthy of examination is the identity of the researcher, which is an important part of the research process. Describing my personal background and hence giving an idea about my identity is particularly necessary considering the research topic under scrutiny in this study.
5.5.1 Reflexivity
Reflexivity has materialized as both a problem and a solution in contemporary approaches addressing to overcome the dilemma of agency and structure. One example is the work of Bourdieu (1990), who particularly criticises the biased predisposition of social scientists when it comes to investigate their own scientific habits and practice, which he calls “scholastic fallacy”. He argues that the social scientist is intrinsically loaded with biases, which can only be overcome by becoming reflexively aware of those preconditions. In doing so, social scientist might liberate themselves from these preconditions, which can possibly led to a more objective practice of social science. According to Bourdieu and Wacquant (1992), scholars are called to acknowledge their social and intellectual unconscious embeddedness in analytic tools and operations of research and to be conscious of their own social positions and dispositions within the social field as well as in the field of social inquiry.
136 The same does apply to management scholars. Same as all other scholars in the various fields of academia, management scholars are not objective and distant entities in the field of management studies. Management scholars are subject to the same contextual influences and their behaviour and thoughts are guided by a shared habitus, which feeds into their academic knowledge creation. Moreover, any social research inquiry, from the initial idea of what to investigate until conducting the research and finally analysing it, is shaped and framed by the researchers own ontological, epistemological and methodological assumptions. In this notion, there is a need for management scholars to acknowledge their own embedeness in the management field and its wider context, rather than simply claiming objectivity.
Several scholars (Bradbury and Lichtenstein 2000, 2010; Hallberg 2006; Mauthner and Doucet 2003; Bourdieu 2003; Hall and Callery 2001) emphasise the importance of reflexive practice in fieldwork, the process of analysis and sense making activities. According to Luttrell (2000), a researcher can achieve such reflexivity in for instance being aware of personal stakes and in trying “not to get mixed up between one’s fantasies, projections, and theories of who the “others” are and who they are in their own right”. She moreover argues that researcher make often mistakes because of their “blind spots and the intensity of their social, emotional, and intellectual involvement in and with the subject of their research” (p. 515).
In conclusion, the notion of reflexivity calls me as the researcher of this study, to be conscious of my own social position and disposition within the social field and the field I investigated. Two different methods, namely the collection of visual data and a research diary, were deployed in order to aid the reflexivity of this research. For instance Mannay (2010: 91) pledges for the collection of visual data arguing
The centrality of the researcher and their position in relation to the research setting has been subject to controversy and long standing debates threaded
137 with the narratives of insider and outsider myths. Insiders are often charged with the tendency to present their group in an unrealistically favourable light, and their work is often considered to be overshadowed by the enclosed, self-contained world of common understanding.
Collecting visual data can therefore help to suspend own preconceptions regarding the researched phenomenon. This is particularly useful attempting to make the familiar strange when the researchers own experience mirrors that of their participants (Mannay 2010).
As mentioned above, a research diary was kept to aid the reflexivity in the research process. I took research notes when I thought that it was crucial, during the entire field study. These notes include not only observations but also my impressions and feelings in different situation during my field work, which later helped me in making sense of the reflexive dimension of the research. The research diary was used to inform methodological and theoretical decisions during the research process and pursuit the reflexivity and awareness of my own epistemological assumptions (Nadin and Cassell 2006). A researcher must be constantly aware of their own position and set of internalised structures, and how these can bias their objectivity. Reflexivity is the precondition to specify unconscious presuppositions and complete the internalisation of a more sufficient epistemology (Bourdieu 1992). Using a research diary not only informed my methodological and theoretical decisions but also helped me to reflect on my own ontological and epistemological assumptions. In this regard, the following section not only presents my personal background, but also a reflexive account of the process of field research.
5.5.2 My personal background
This sections starts in describing my personal background and continues with a reflexive account of the research process. I am female, thirty-six years old and I was born in Germany, but I am not native-born German as my parents are both of
138 Greek ethnicity. I acquired the German citizenship only in recent years and this for two reasons. First of all, as described in a previous chapter of this thesis, the German citizenship used to be based on the so-called “bloodline” until recently. I was simply not entitled of the German citizenship for most of my life. Secondly, I waited until the European Union introduced a law, which granted members of the European Union the right of holding two citizenships. This means that I was living in my birth country holding a Greek passport, but not a German for twenty- eight years. Hence, I was for example not allowed to vote in elections. The description of persons such as me changed several times during my time in Germany. For more than twenty-five years I belonged to the group of guest worker children or alternatively foreigner and after Germany realised that it is a country of immigration I was suddenly a person with a migration background, without having actually ever immigrated to any place. However, the only thing I was surely not was a German, as I was simply missing the right mixture of blood. Would somebody ask me how I would describe myself I would chose to call myself a transnational. As described in an earlier chapter of this thesis, transnationalism refers to the phenomenon according to which a rising number of people have only loose ties to a nation state (European Commission 2008), live dual lives, speak two languages and have homes in two countries. Since I am living now in the UK for the last three years I need to add one more language as well as one more home.
Having spent most of my life in Germany, I also obtained my university degree there. After school, I went to the University Duisburg-Essen to study Social Science. Back then, the University I studied in was a place dominated by native- born Germans. This means that all of the staff was native-born German and only a few students belonged to an ethnic minority. Studying sociology as a main subject, I focused my interest on different subjects during my studies. However, I was never particularly interested in race related issues, and for instance issues such as race discrimination never seemed to be a matter for me. Despite of this I started working for a research institute, which employed me initially to work on a project concerned with ethnic minority issues. In my final years of study I started
139 to develop a particular interest for developing countries and development aid. As a result I decided to write my diploma dissertation about related issues. However, when I firstly went to my supervisor in order to discuss this idea with him he told me: “Why do you not write about immigrants would be much easier for you”. At the end I followed his advice and that is how my interest was in fact pushed in this direction. Such “pushes” were also described by some of my stakeholder interviewees who belong to an ethnic minority, who described that they felt pushed in such topics just because of their ethnicity regardless of their educational background and expertise.
However, I wrote my dissertation titled: “An examination of the state of integration of the second generation of guest workers in Germany”, which when reading now just shows me how powerful the dominant perspective is. I need to explain what I exactly mean here and for that I have to describe briefly the research methodology deployed for this dissertation. In order to “assess” the state of integration of ethnic minorities, or how I used to call them second generation of guest workers, I drew on a framework developed by the Hartmut Esser.
As you might realise now it is exactly his work I criticised in a previous chapter of this thesis. Having adopted and reproduced the dominant view in the past, I was unaware of the ethnocentric and racist undertone of his work. This means that I not only used the language used in the dominant discourse, which for example included terms such as guest worker children and integration and not such terms as for instance race equality or even equal opportunities, apart from the fact that such terms are simply not available in relation to race related issues, but also I adopted the dominant perspective in assessing the integration and assimilation of guest workers. I did not at all engage with issues such as race discrimination and I entirely ignored the role of the receiving country and population for the so-called integration of ethnic minorities.
That I adopted the dominant perspective back then is rather unsurprising, as the dominant group sets the modes and also assigns the language to tackle such
140 issues. Me being in a university, which is dominated by the majority group, and me reading literature, which is written predominantly by the majority group, led to the fact that I simply reproduced their view, without even doubting it. Similar examples occurred also in the scope of my study. For instance, some of the participants of the migrant representative discussion I observed for this research project reproduced the dominant view on race related issues, which led to a heated discussion with the audience.
However, I had great university years and I can’t report that I have been treated differently during my university years, if there would not be this one last day of study. The first comment of one of my examiners, to the other examiner was: “ Look at her, can she not speak a great German?” I have not been speechless often in my life, but this was one time. However, the respond of the second examiner then astonished me further: “Come on, of course she can speak a good German, she is Greek and not Turkish. Greeks are very keen about education unlike Turks.” While I was shocked back then, today I have to say I am thankful for this comment. It was an eye opening experience.
Further relevant experiences relate to two important issues: the relevance of networks and the existence of power relations. After my degree I realised that I do not dispose necessary networks, which are necessary to access a number of positions in the job market. In order to overcome this circumstance I took part in a programme, which was created to help female academics belonging to an ethnic minority in developing the needed networks to pursue a career in the field of their choice. This programme was matching mentee with mentors, according to the interest of the mentee. I had a particular idea about the area I wanted to get access to. As I was already working in a project inquiring the state of diversity management in Germany, I decided that I would like to continue working in this field. When I had the first meeting with one of the organisers of the programme, I named a particular person, which I thought would be a perfect match for me and who was one of the leading scholars in the German field of diversity management. The organiser of the programme contacted this person and luckily she agreed
141 mentoring me. She was my official mentor for a year and actually she continued mentoring me for some more time afterwards.
Retrospectively, I have to say that this match was my door opener to the field of diversity management in Germany, a field, which by now is dominated by native- born Germans. However, due to this network I took part in a further education course concerned with diversity management, I was offered to participate in publications and I received valuable advice. However, being in this field I fast realised that the field of diversity management is dominated by native-born Germans and that race related issues are not included in the diversity management agenda. The main focus was and is woman equality. Having said this, it is not surprising that my feelings, particularly during the participation in the further education course were ambivalent.
Moreover, it was not only me having ambivalent feelings. There were other course participants who belonged to an ethnic minority. Particularly one was criticising the approach towards diversity management advocated in this course. She repeatedly articulated her criticism, in particular regarding the absence of race related issues, which led to the fact that she became an outsider in this course, as the dominant group did not support her view. She not only became an outsider in this group, but also it became difficult for her to gain ground in the field of diversity management in Germany. This experience made me more than aware of the existing power relations in the field and I decided to utilise a different strategy for myself, a strategy, which consisted of handling this ambivalence between expressing my criticism and opinion without being excluded from the field, I aimed working in. This juggling act is still challenging.
Having described my personal background, I shall now move to the reflexive account of the research process. Every research process starts with an idea, a question or a couple of questions. Clearly the research questions underlying this research project partially evolved due to my personal background. The same does apply to the selection of the interviewed stakeholder. Fifteen of them belong to an
142 ethnic minority in Germany. Choosing them has been a very conscious decision, knowing that a minority ethnic perspective on race related issues and diversity management is nearly absent in Germany. Securing research access has been a further stage, which needed careful consideration. I was aware that asking for access for interviews and a case study, which were designed to investigate race related issues and the management of ethnic diversity, would possibly not be welcomed by some native-born Germans, particularly considering that the researcher, I, does belong to an ethnic minority in Germany, which is clearly to spot by for example my last name. Because of the sensitive nature of my research topic, I deliberately excluded in some cases terms such as race discrimination when introducing my research project in order to secure access. Nonetheless, it was relatively easy securing research access, particularly due to the fact that I have been working in this field for some years, before starting this research project. Having the knowledge about who the relevant stakeholders are in the field and knowing personally a number of relevant stakeholders in the field have been a major advantage.
The major challenge I encountered conducting the interviews and the company case study and this for various reasons. Due to my own positionalities and interests it was often not possible to engage in an open, totally honest and transparent conversation. For instance, some of the interviewees made racist comments. In such situations I had to keep a polished face, even when I obviously felt like disagreeing with the views of the interviewee. I had to keep my responses affirmative rather than oppositional in order to not involve myself in a discussion, which would have led into the destruction of the interviews. I found myself more than million times in disagreement with views pronounced by the participants. Particularly the research diary helped me handling such issues, as there was room to describe my feelings and thoughts in such situations. Due to this method this issue became less of a challenge in the course of my fieldwork. A further matter was the massive resistance on side of some participants when questioning race related issues. It was not easy to cope with some of these reactions at times. Particularly the company case study has been a major challenge, as I was aware
143 that the company could stop my investigation at any moment. Therefore, it was necessary to handle such situations very carefully.
Lastly, me being a member of an ethnic minority played an important role in conducting the interviews. Participants belonging to an ethnic minority felt comfortable talking to me about race related issues. All of them kept referring to the Germans as the others and some told me that they simply do not talk with native-born Germans about race related issues being aware of the resistance such topics are generating on side of native-born Germans. A further reason named was simply the fact of being scared expressing their thoughts and therewith risking their social position. In this sense it has been a major advantage that I belong to an ethnic minority in Germany. However, this does not apply in the same way to native-born German participants. While I had most of the time the feeling that the participants were talking quite openly about race related issues and ethnic minorities, I sometimes thought that native-born Germans were choosing their answers very carefully; particularly I had the feeling that they were sometimes trying to please me with their answers and to show me a positive attitude towards ethnic minorities. Coming back to my personal background and experience, I might ought to say that exactly this personal background and experience made it easier for me to cope with and reflect on the challenges faced in conducting this study.
5.6 Research ethics
Besides thinking about the own role as a researcher in a research project, it is of huge importance to think about the participants, in particular in relation to ethical issues. Blumberg et al. (2005) defines ethics as the moral principles, norms or standards of behaviour, guiding moral choices concerning our behaviour as well as our relationships with others. Research does not work without human beings and from the moment where human beings are involved, we have to think about ethics (Punch 1994). Ethical standards have to be observed when doing research to ensure that a research will be conducted and carried out in a balanced ethical
144 way. Several ethical guidelines are accessible for this purpose. In addition to the different ethical guidelines, people who are participating in research are protected by the Human Rights Act 1998, the Data Protection Act 1998 and other relevant European Directives and conventions.
The protection of research participants is of large importance. Any kind of harm must be avoided in any case. Harm in this relation, and in particular in relation to interviewing people or using visual media, can be for example to place people in stressful, embarrassing, anxiety-producing, or unpleasant situations (Neumann 2006). To avoid such negative effects it is necessary to take a number of measures. Ethical principles have to be considered at any stage of the research process, beginning with the research question and topic, when adapting the research strategy and the choice of methods. For example while preparing the interview guide, I had to think about the questions carefully as they should not harm people in any way. Considering the sensitive topic of this study, the questions had to be formulated very cautiously. As mentioned previously, race related issues are taboo in Germany. Bearing this in mind, I had to be particularly cautious when asking questions that tackled race related issues.
A further measure is the creation of an informed consent for the participants, as only asking for permission to conduct an interview is not sufficient. Each of the interviewees received an informed consent, before the interviews took place. This informed consent includes all information about the purpose, methods and procedure of the research, the expected duration of the study, intended possible uses of the research, what their participation in the research entails and what risks could be, if any, involved.
To avoid such negative effects for the participants, it is also necessary to think about issues such as anonymity and confidentiality. (Neumann 2007: 139). In order to secure confidentiality for the interviewed stakeholder as well as for the employees of the case study company, all participants are kept anonymous. The participants are renamed with fictitious names. In keeping their real names
145 confidentially and presenting some of the data in aggregate form, no information, which could permit linking specific individuals to specific responses, is released. Moreover, the recorded interviews as the transcribed interviews are stored in a secure place, which nobody can access besides me. Anonymity and confidentiality is insured through these actions. For the visual data, I collected during this study I have not been able to obtain appropriate copyright clearance. Therefore, all pictures done for this study are not illustrated in this thesis. However, although I could not use them in printed form, the pictures are part of the analysis of this study.
5.7 Conclusion
In this chapter, I explained the research philosophy, design and methodology of this research project, as well as the reasons for examining reality from a multilevel perspective. In order to do that, I showed how approaches such as critical realism along with Bourdieu and Layder helps doing that. In order to offer a critical realist account of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany, I use a multi-level analytical framework, as explained in this chapter. Additionally, I utilise multi-methods strategy. Critical realist underpinning of this work informed the choice of research methodology and of the specific research methods. My research aims to explore the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany and sets out to do this in a multilevel and relational framework. The choice of this methodology is useful, because it enables me, the researcher, to examine the three layers of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany, as well as the interrelations of these levels.
The stakeholder interviews are utilised to understand how the field of diversity management influences the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Conducting a single company case study, this study aims to understand the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in an actual organisational setting. The insights coming from both, the stakeholder interviews and the single company case study, are aimed to give an account of the agency of diversity
146 management stakeholders in the field of diversity management in Germany. Hence, using multiple research methods is not only seen as a tool to triangulate data, but rather also as a mean to gain insights from each method for exploring different layers of the habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany and for uncovering the hidden and underlying mechanisms, which shape this habitus. This approach gives this PhD research an advantage of examing the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity at different levels and from different perspectives.
Acknowledging that achieving full objectivity is impossible in understanding reality, this chapter gave an account to reflexivity in the research process and explained my personal background. Doing this, I used reflexivity in the research process in order to reduce bias. I documented my personal views in order to understand how these views may influence my choice of the research subject, the chosen methods, the relations with participants and lastly the data analysis. Moreover, I deployed triangulation to reduce bias and diversify the data.
Research access was secured in various ways. Some participants were contacted directly by me, others through colleagues and friends of mine. Particularly, getting access to a company for the case study was only possible in drawing on contacts from my own professional network in the field of diversity management in Germany. Drawing on my network, thirty stakeholder interviews and one single case study were conducted for this research project. Moreover, this projects draws on an extensive literature review, field notes, a research diary, a focus group, photographs and observations. Interview schedules were drawn from gaps in the literature and those with company case study employees were adapted to correspond to each of the participant’s position in the company. NVivo, a computer software designed for conducting qualitative analysis, was utilised to code and analyse the data. All of these various aspects of the research process contributed to improving the quality of the research.
147 Chapter Six
Analysis I: Symbolic violence as mechanism of habitus
6.1 Introduction
This chapter examines symbolic violence against Turkish people in Germany in tandem with the Bourdieuan concept of habitus. Scrutinizing symbolic violence is important as symbolic violence can be viewed as one mechanism of habitus, which feeds into the notion of integration as well as in the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Examining symbolic violence against ethnic minority Turks in Germany provides insights of deeper levelled structures, which underpin the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. It shows the deeper-rooted hidden structures underneath the surface level, which guide and constitute habitus, as well as the interwoven nature of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity.
I utilise Bourdieu’s concepts of symbolic violence and habitus in attempting to explain how order and restraint are established and maintained through indirect cultural mechanisms, as opposed to direct, coercive control (Bourdieu 1977; Jenkins 1992) and how these cultural mechanisms influence the development of a shared habitus that produces and reproduces practice, namely patterns of behaviour. Symbolic violence is defined as a partly unconscious instrument of domination and an imposing system of symbolism and meaning, for example in thought and perception, upon subordinated groups or classes in order to secure the social reproduction of relations of domination (Jenkins 1992; Bourdieu 1994). This symbolic power is according to Bourdieu (1984: 23) is utilised
(…) to conserve or to transform current classifications in matters of gender, nation, religion, age and social status, and this through the words used to designate or to describe individuals, groups or institutions.
148 As such symbolic violence takes place in such a way that exclusion and inclusion are naturalised and experienced as legitimate. This legitimacy shadows the existing power relations and makes them often unrecognisable to, and invisible to individuals who experience them. Thereby, individuals consent to the dominant values and the behavioural schema currently utilised in the field (Kim 2004). Moreover, the internalised violence manifests within the self-consciousness of individuals as well as a shared habitus (Jenkins 1992; Bourdieu 1994). Habitus is defined as the “product of internalisation of the principles of a cultural arbitrary capable of perpetuating itself” (Bourdieu and Passeron 1977: 31), reflecting an embodied system of dispositions, which generate and organise practice (Jenkins 1992). Hence, habitus disposes individuals to behave in a particular way (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992), often without conscious realisation, which can lead into the reproduction of the structures that limit them (Hunter 2004). For instance, gender domination, and also the construction of gender itself represents one field of symbolic violence (Bourdieu 2001). However, this chapter focuses on the domination of ethnic minorities and the construction of ethnicity itself through symbolic violence. In this chapter I identify two different forms of symbolic violence: linguistic and visual symbolic violence.
“A large number of Arabs and Turks in this city, who have increased in number as a result of wrong policies, have no productive function other than the fruit and vegetable trade". This statement can be found, among other disparaging remarks related to ethnic minorities, in the October 2009 (p.198) issue of the German cultural magazine Lettre International. Thilo Sarrazin, a board member of the German Central Bank and former Finance Minister of Berlin, when asked to give an interview about Berlin's economic problems, claimed that immigrants sponge off the state that they are incapable of integrating themselves into German society, that they constantly produce little girls in headscarves and that Turks are conquering Germany through a higher birth rate, just like Kosovars once did in the Kosovo. His remarks provoked a heated and also controversial debate about immigration in Germany. Although the polemical nature of his statements has been criticised, it was later revealed that many people in Germany agreed with
149 his views. For example, it was not surprising that right-wing newspapers such as the Junge Freiheit supported his views. However, the more mainstream newspapers such as the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Die Welt and the Bild, also commented that Mr. Sarrazin just describes real problems (Spiegel Online 2009). A survey by pollster Emnid for daily Bild Zeitung found that fifty-one percent of Germans agreed with Sarrazin while just thirty-nine percent disagreed (EuropeNews 2009). Another survey in daily Die Welt showed that over two- thirds felt the criticism of Sarrazin was unjustified.
More recently, Thilo Sarrazin (2010) published an explosive book titled "Deutschland schafft sich ab” (“Germany does away with itself”). In his book he continues arguing in the same vein, with remarks such as that Muslims undermine German society and more shockingly that Turks are genetically less intelligent than Germans. Strikingly, only one particular comment he made in his book caused a storm of appal and dismissal. In one section of his book he referred to the existence of what he calls a Jewish gene. Only then some media reporters called Sarrazin's comments racist, divisive and simply wrong and one even drew parallels between his book and Hitler's "Mein Kampf" (Spiegel Online 2010). Only after referring to the alleged Jewish gene Sarrazin was finally “rejected from the board of the Bundesbank for his comments, but his book has been flying off the shelves” (Graham 2010: no page). This last insight is very interesting, interesting because it shows that his previous derogatory descriptions of ethnic minority Turks and Muslims in general seem not to be perceived of being of racist nature. Only his reference to the alleged Jewish gene triggered something in the German society. It seems racism and race discrimination is only acknowledged in relation to Jews and/or violent forms of racism in Germany.
However, the Sarrazin example is not an isolated case. People of Turkish ethnicity are constantly and for a long period of time portrayed in a negative manner in Germany. We can date such derogatory descriptions of Turks back to the recession in the year 1973, when for the first time after the Second World War, hostility towards ethnic minorities, in other words racism, became socially
150 acceptable again, particularly against Turks. Comments such as “The Turks are coming, run for your lives" (Der Spiegel 31/1973), referring to an invasion of (often criminal and violent) Turks in Germany, appeared in the dominant discourse, as well as other statements similar to recent statements in the Sarrazin case. However, according to Hope Cheong et al. (2007: 35),
(…) minority ethnic immigrant populations have been traditionally perceived as ominous and invading others, threatening social norms and violating economic principles”.
Nonetheless, examining the current case a difference did occur; this case drew public attention and generated a much heated debate. On the one hand, this can be explained by the fact that Thilo Sarrazin is a prominent persona. On the other hand, although many people in Germany shared these views, others did not and that they have spoken up. Increased willingness of the few to talk about and against racism in Germany marks current context as different to previous times.
The following analysis section contains of two parts. The first part talks about linguistic violence. Linguistic violence starts with the availability of vocabulary to define terms of race related issues. German language is ill equipped to offer a vocabulary of resistance concerning race related issues, I argue. The second part refers to visual forms of symbolic violence. Visual symbolic violence is about the visual representation of ethnic minorities in a way, which undermines diversity of their experiences, agency and humanity (Weber-Menges 2005). In the final part of the chapter the conclusion, strategies for change and in order to eliminate different and entrenched forms of symbolic violence are offered. I propose strategies of change that are predicated on a common agenda of human rights, including extensive economic and social rights to full employment, social security and social provision (see Carpenter 2010).
Understanding linguistic and visual symbolic violence requires us to attend to relations of power. Bourdieu describes power in terms of 'symbolic capital',
151 which comes with social position. For instance, the production mode of what is articulated in the dominant discourse is controlled by what we might call the “symbolic elites,” such as journalists, writers, directors, academics, politicians and other groups exercising power (Bourdieu 1977; Bourdieu and Passeron 1977). Thereby, ethnic minorities clearly do not present a group that exercises power in Germany. For instance, relevant research by ethnic minority women is largely ignored (Bednarz-Braun 2004). This is congruent with the fact that only one per cent of journalists of daily newspapers belong to an ethnic minority in Germany and strikingly eighty-four per cent of daily newspapers do have a solely native-born German workforce (Geißler and Pöttker 2005).
However, there are a few attempts at creating alternative outlets, such as research institutes or online magazines, owned and managed by people of Turkish ethnicity. One important example is the Futureorg research institute or the online journal MIGAZIN - Migration in Germany. Nonetheless, ethnic minorities do not hold the power to influence agendas of public discussion or topical relevance as well as to influence who is portrayed in what way. This power lays clearly in the hand of the native-born German population in Germany. For instance Van Dyk (1996: 22) argues “in sum, the mainstream news media are inherently part of a power structure of elite groups and institutions, whose models of the ethnic situation provide (sometimes very subtle and indirect) support for the ethnic status quo of white group dominance”.
6.2 Linguistic violence: If we do not talk about it, we are not doing it.
This section examines linguistic violence in two interwoven aspects. First, I draw attention to the absence of suitable terms concerning race related issues. The second aspect refers to the finding that in Germany race discrimination is marked by a collective silence, which prevents the development of an emancipator linguistic repertoire. The vocabulary pertaining to race equality is lacking, which makes it difficult to deal with racism. For instance, the term race is declared taboo and terms such as racism are only used in relation to violent racism by Neo-Nazis
152 or about racism abroad, but not for example regarding every day experiences of discrimination or racial discrimination at work. Terms such as ‘resentment’, ‘xenophobia’ or ‘discrimination’ are used instead (Van Dyk 1995). Additionally, terms such as racism are believed to overstress ‘moderate’ or ‘modern’ forms of today’s racism (Dovidio and Gaertner 1986). The absence of suitable terms shows that there is a resistance regarding race related issues in Germany. One could argue that the understanding of racism in Germany does not go beyond the Holocaust (Alibhai-Brown 1999). Erkan, who is the head of a research institute and a lawyer (male and of Turkish ethnicity), elaborated how this works:
People only talk about racism if ethnic minorities are physically attacked in particular if these people are Jews. This is a big sensation and then they are very sensitive. But for example race discrimination at work is never mentioned.
Adding to this Tina, an associate of a trade union (female and native-born German), explains:
There are these racists, these bad Nazis, yes and that is then immensely present in media. One is talking about that. But there are also other forms of discrimination. For example in education and in the labour market and such things and I believe that is a big difference. So, if one hears that skinheads are demonstrating on the street, that is horrible and should not happen, also because the whole world can see that. But this subtle discrimination yes, so subtle racism, I think for that there exists no awareness. So if it is about racism, the Nazis are discriminating and not us.
However, what these words show is that there is no understanding regarding current race discrimination in German society or workplaces. A further good example of resistance towards race related issues is the case study company of this study. The case study company is a communication-service company that conducts operations in more than 150 markets and employs 32,000 employees, all
153 over the world with five plants in Germany. The company does have a comprehensive global diversity management policy. However, on the national level race related issues are absent and not part of the diversity management approach. Interviews revealed that questioning race related issues in this company was almost impossible, as participants demonstrated strong forms of resistance to the use of this term. This rigid stance against the use of the term ‘race’ was defended in different ways; for example, it was simply made ridiculous and sometimes there was even an increased tone of aggression in the interviews. Discussing race related issues generated an immense reaction by participants in this organisation.
According to the expert interview participants, the absence of viable terms and the treatment of race related issues could partly be explained with the German Nazi-past and the difficulty of handling this past. Irene (female and native-born German), an academic explained it in this way: “The debate is difficult because of the Nazi past. One is not talking about racism or discrimination or the whole topic and the whole topic gets also not connected with the Third Reich”. Safran (2000) argues that the national guilt has deeply affected the collective memory and even now guilt plays a key role in many facets of contemporary German social and political life. Certain studies and incidents have revealed an astonishing ignorance about the Nazi-past (Fulbrook 2007) and this ignorance seems to be also transferred to current race discrimination issues. It is not only that terms are taboo, there is an obvious avoidance of most issues related to current forms of racial discrimination. According to Alibhai-Brown (1999), “Germany has not really understood racism beyond the Holocaust”. Clearly the memory and legacy of the Nazi-past has special implications in Germany (Fullbrook 1989; 1999; Rosenthal 1998).
In not providing suitable terms regarding race related issues, the topic gets silenced in Germany. This secures that native-born Germans can avoid topics such as racism and race discrimination, which generate feelings of ambivalence and invoke unpleasant memories of the Nazi-past. Thereby, racism should be
154 avoided and ignored. This reaction can also be understood as a mechanism to dilute current attempts at combating race discrimination, as: if they do not talk about it, they cannot be doing it. It is interesting to note that the dominant group has the main symbolic power to construct and reproduce the social reality of ethnicity, and to provide and produce its terms (Bourdieu 1977; Jenkins 1992; Bourdieu 2001). Failing to provide suitable terms and silencing race related issues ensures the reproduction of established hierarchies, which helps to ensure that one group dominates another and in so doing violates the subordinate group.
Silencing of race related issues also shapes the agency of members of ethnic minorities. A recent meeting held by academics of Turkish ethnicity and government representatives brought up some important issues. The participants of this meeting reproduced the dominant view on ethnic minorities during their discussions and speeches. Issues such as race discrimination have not been raised at all. This can be partly explained by the internalisation of symbolic violence throughout the life course of an individual. Symbolic violence takes place in such a way that exclusion and inclusion are naturalised and experienced as legitimate. In this meeting, Turkish parents were held responsible for the educational failure or weak language skills of pupils. The same one-sided argument can be found in the dominant discourse (see Buschkowsky 2009; Böhmer 2008). Also it has been argued during the meeting that every individual is responsible for its own failure or success in life, indicating a preference to focus on choices rather than chances in life that serves to render institutional forms of discrimination invisible.
A second aspect of the agency of members of ethnic minorities is their voice. Hirschman (1970: 30) defines voice as
… any attempt to change, rather than to escape from, an objectionable state of affairs, whether through individual or collective petition to the management directly in charge, through appeal to a higher authority with the intention of forcing a change in management, or through various types
155 of actions and protests, including those that are meant to mobilize public opinion.
In fact, ethnic minority’s voice is silenced, concerning race related issues and in particular race discrimination. Turgut, the head of an integration advisory board (male and of Turkish ethnicity), said the following “we do not mention race discrimination. There is resistance that you can feel. We cannot reach them if we address the problem in such a way.” A more detailed description of this phenomenon comes from Cem, the head of a research institute (male and of Turkish ethnicity), who carried out a research project concerned with highly skilled ethnic minorities in Germany. In an attempt to explain the absence of terms such as race discrimination and racism in the published research report, he said:
It was on purpose that we didn’t use those terms. These terms are perceived as negative in public. These terms are causing a reflex in the wider public, which leads, and this is my personal observation and experience, to the fact that my conversational partner draws back from the conversation. But I need the dialog, if we want to find a solution for this problem (he is talking about race discrimination at work). This means that if we want to find a solution for this problem we have to distance us from these as negative perceived terms and we have to find other neutral terms, which do not say you are discriminating, you are hostile against foreigners or you are a racist.
An even stronger example displays how the power of the dominant group silences ethnic minority members in Germany. Mustafa, a member of a governmental department (male and of Turkish ethnicity), said:
… you know, if you are in a good position, if you have a good job, you will not stand up, you do not want to risk your status. You will not talk about race discrimination.
156
This is not surprising, as people often prefer to keep silent rather than to have a word. Remaining silent appears safer, compared with voice, which is perceived as risky (Morrison and Milliken 2000), especially for groups which have achieved success in careers as pioneers.
6.3 Visual violence
Visual symbolic violence is about the visual representation of ethnic minorities in a way, which undermines the diversity of their experiences, agency and humanity. Visual symbolic violence can be transported through different channels, for example through print media as well as audio-visual media. This includes for example daily and weekly newspapers, as well as TV newscasts or material available on the Internet. In the case of Germany we can see a media landscape, which is mainly deficit oriented if referring to ethnic minorities. In general, there is only limited reporting of ethnic minority issues in Germany. If there is reporting it is always “about” ethnic minorities as objects, which have to be evaluated.
The agency of minority ethnic citizens remains ignored and their self-descriptions are often dismissed. Additionally, positive reporting is nearly absent; for example, reporting is never about successful members of ethnic minorities (Ruhrmann and Nieland 2001; Müller 2005). The contrary is the case. For instance Elke, an academic and diversity trainer (female and native-born German), explained:
I think there is a relative high presence of ethnic minorities by now. It became quite natural. There is still a discussion regarding the educational system and the deviant behaviour of people with migration background (this term is often used in the German context when referring to ethnic minorities), so therefore it is about deviance. People with migration background are perceived as
157 deviant. However, what is missing, which I think is dramatic, are the success stories and this connection the question how does successful integration happen.
Several studies, examining print and audio-visual media, revealed that ethnic minority members are more frequently associated with crime, in particular with violent crime, and are frequently named in relation to costs and as foreign bodies, which impair and effect negatively the German way of life when compared to native-born Germans. Further reports are concerned with high numbers of ethnic minorities in schools and kindergartens, language problems of ethnic minorities, unemployed members of ethnic minorities which fleece the state, oppressed woman with head scarves (Pinn 1997; Neumann 2002; Geißler and Pöttker 2005; Ruhrmann and Sommer 2005; Spetsmann-Kunkel 2007; Senol 2009).
Moreover we have to pay attention to visual symbolic violence in form of pictures or film, which are utilised to emphasise the negative representation of ethnic minorities. In particular, experts of Turkish ethnicity have picked up these visual forms of symbolic violence during their interviews. Murat, a politician and academic (male and of Turkish ethnicity), said the following:
The debate is poorly, suboptimal, deficit oriented, (after a longer pause he continues with an upset tone of voice). When it is about integration or the Islam, it is always negative: terrorism and woman with headscarf. The Tagesschau (newscast at ARD, a TV channel governed by public law) is a good example for that, where you can see that always. Whenever referring to the topic of integration you see in the background always a trailer, where a woman with headscarf is passing by, holding an ALDI plastic bag in her hand. Yes, yes that’s how it goes here in Germany.
For example Koydl (1999), a reporter for the German Daily Süddeutsche Zeitung in Istanbul until 2000, described that when the western press is working with
158 clichés regarding Islam, there is a particular fascination with the headscarf of “the” Turkish woman in the visual media.
However, Sonja Weber-Menges (2005) argues that those largely negative deformed presentation of ethnic minorities are merely supporting the readily available ethnocentric views and stereotypes and are constructing negative images of ethnic minorities, encouraging discrimination as well as hostile behaviours towards ethnic minorities. Similarly, most expert interviews with native-born participants, even when engaging with diversity management or anti- discrimination topics, have described ethnic minorities in deficit terminology. The situation was the same in the case study organisation. A member of the human resources unit (female and native-born German) explained: “we do not have Turks here, because they do not have the qualifications that we need”. A manager (male and native-born German) explained further: “I cannot send a Turkish woman with headscarf to a client”. It is obvious that the mainly negative representation of ethnic minorities, particularly of Turks, has been internalised by both native-born Germans and people of Turkish ethnicity. Only in recent times, a small group of Turkish people started speaking up against this form of representation (see Senol, 2009).
The representation of ethnic minorities in public life is another important factor for change in Germany. A shared habitus towards workers of Turkish ethnicity prevents organisations from employing them, even when they are highly skilled. Changing the face of the public sector through race quotas would represent an important step towards better representation of ethnic minorities. It would also help to free the so far untapped potential of the ethnic minority workforce in Germany. It is not only the call for race equality, which shows us the need for the inclusion of ethnic minority workers, Germany cannot longer afford to have a central workforce drawn only from native born Germans. In Western Europe, it is widely acknowledged that the integration of ethnic minority working population potential is needed (Fotakis 2000) in order to balance the effect of increasing labour shortages and insecure welfare states (Esping-Andersen 2001) and in order
159 to meet the challenge of the demographic change through ageing societies (Healy and Schwarz-Woelzl 2007; European Commission 2007). Unfortunately, the high unemployment rates among skilled ethnic minority workers demonstrate a lack of understanding that the face of talent is now very diverse in Germany.
6.4 Conclusion
Providing an account of how symbolic violence manifests against people of Turkish ethnicity in Germany and in the terminology concerning race related issues, I drew on the work of Pierre Bourdieu and critiqued the effects of symbolic violence, in the form of linguistic and visual symbolic violence, as exercised by “symbolic elites”. These insights show us the power and effects of linguistic symbolic violence. By not providing suitable terms concerning race discrimination and by silencing race related issues, the established hierarchy remains untouched and members of ethnic minorities are silenced. Only those in power are in a position to break this cycle. Therefore, I argue that the subject of race discrimination has to be articulated and brought into the dominant discourse and I also argue that members of ethnic minorities should be provided with voice, which has to include power and influence, in order to articulate their legitimate demands for equality and inclusion.
Reflecting on expert interviews and the case study, I moreover demonstrated how symbolic violence is practiced everyday against people of Turkish ethnicity. Failure to employ workers of Turkish ethnicity is legitimated in my study with internalised arguments referring to people of Turkish ethnicity being deficient across various job criteria. Moreover, these insights might explain why organisations still view the management of ethnic diversity as pertinent.
160 Chapter Seven
Analysis II: Integracism as mechanism of habitus
7.1 Introduction
The notion of integration is the dominant concept in the management of ethnic diversity in Germany. Hence, it is important to analyse the notion of integration in the German context, when aiming to understand the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. The aim of this chapter is twofold. One aim is to examine the corrosion of the notion of integration with racial bias, which undermines the overdue proposal of equal opportunities at work. Arrangements of integration for immigrants include requirements of extensive documentation, training, point based calculations based on qualifications, economic wealth and experience, citizenship rituals. Most of these requirements are highly variable, based often on racial profiling. There is a surge in the use of the concept of integration in management of immigration. It could be argued that these politics and practices of managing ethnic minorities and immigrants are not as innocuous as they may seem at first sight. This chapter shows that the notion of integration in Germany is underpinned by ethnocentrism and racial bias. It is also shown how ethnocentrism and racial bias influence employment practices of ethnic minority workers. This brings us to the second aim of this chapter, which is to illustrate how the racial biased and ethnocentric notion of integration feeds into the habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Therefore, integration, or in this case integracism, can be understood as one underlying mechanism of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany.
This chapter consists of four parts. The first part examines norms of national identity. The second and third part examines integracism in two different settings, the setting of schools and the setting of employment. The forth and last part
161 discusses the ethnic minority perspective on the issue, a perspective so far ignored in the dominant ‘ethnocentric’ discourse on integration.
7.2 The construction of citizenship, national and citizen identities
This section consists of three parts. The first part talks about the construction of national and citizen identities in Germany, focussing on the interplay of the German citizenship definition and the therewith-related definition of national identity and who is German and who not. The following two sections discuss three implications for ethnic minorities in Germany, resulting from legal foundation of citizenship law: the absence of political power for ethnic minority Turks and the exclusion of ethnic minority Turks from working in the civil service sector.
The process of citizenship creation as well as the definition of the German citizenship and therewith-related definition of national identity and who is German and who not, has various implications for ethnic minorities in Germany. Considering this, it is necessary to examine both the foundation of citizenship in its interplay with the integration discourse as well as the therewith-connected implications for ethnic minority individuals. The questions of who belongs to the German nation state and who is perceived of being German are questions that need to be asked in this regard. For instance Bourdieu (2004) refers to immigrants as individuals, which
have no appropriate place in social space and no set place in social classification. Neither citizen nor foreigner, not truly on the side of the Same nor really on the side of the Other, he exists within that ‘bastard’ place, of which Plato also speaks, on the frontier between being and social non-being. Displaced, in the sense of being incongruous and inopportune, he is a source of embarrassment. The difficulty we have in thinking about him – even in science, which often reproduces, without realizing it, the presuppositions and omissions of the official vision – simply recreates the
162 embarrassment created by his burdensome non-existence. Always the wrong place, and mow as out of place in his society of origin as he is in the host society; the immigrant obliges us to rethink completely the question of the legitimate foundation of citizenship and of relations between citizen and state, nation or nationality (Bourdieu 2004: xiv).
Having the perception of being in the wrong place and of not having a set place in social classification makes it very difficult to develop a feeling of belongingness as well as a collective identity. This problem is reflected clearly in one of Mustafa’s statements, who is a member of a governmental department (male and of Turkish ethnicity):
There is no context of a shared identity in Germany and there is also not a development in that direction. It is always in the relationship, there are we; the ones, which are the natives and the others, which de facto just turned up and basically, do not belong here. But the primary problem you have with yourself in trying to allocate yourself to a collective identity, which does not really exist.
Accordingly Cem, the head of a research team (male and of Turkish ethnicity) , says:
I do not really belong here to 100 per cent, no matter how I changed and the feeling of maybe being a Greek despite the German roots is as strong or weak as for a Turk or an Italian.
These statements point out that ethnic minority individuals lack a feeling of belongingness in Germany. Naturalisation (all of the interviewed stakeholders belonging to an ethnic minority are actually naturalised), and being highly skilled seems not vanish this issue. Clearly ethnic minority individuals are having difficulties in allocating themselves to a collective German identity. This indicates that rethinking the foundation of citizenship and the relations between citizen and
163 state, nation or nationality has not taken place yet, leading as a matter of fact to an existence of ethnic minority individuals on the frontier between being and social non-being. A further aspect influencing the self-allocation of ethnic minority individuals in terms of national identity is the experience of discrimination. This can be stated particularly for ethnic minority Turks, which according to Skrobanek (2007: 20)
… tend to (re)ethnicisation when they perceive themselves and their group as being discriminated against. Perceived discrimination has direct and indirect effects on (re)ethnicisation, on perceived permeability of group boundaries and on the social identity of the young people.
Hence, when a young ethnic minority Turk feels discriminated against, “he or she will identify more closely with his or her own group, the less he or she believes in the possibility of one day becoming part of the German majority group” (Skrobanek 2007: 20).
Nonetheless, the naturalization of ethnic minorities is seen as a major pillar on the route to a successful integration in Germany. It is argued that non-naturalised ethnic minority individuals are less integrated than naturalised ones and statistics show that naturalized ethnic minority individuals attain higher educational credentials and are less likely to be unemployed (Babka von Gostomski 2010). Thus, one could expect that the German government would prioritise and ease the naturalization process for ethnic minorities in Germany. This is only partially the case. For instance Mustafa, who is a member of a governmental department (male and of Turkish ethnicity), argues:
Current regulations and policies concerning immigrants in Germany contain a number of discriminatory factors, which prevent migrants from developing a feeling of belongingness. These regulations are viewed as unproblematic by the majority, it has to be like this, and this is a contradiction. Politics could change these issues and they should, but they are not getting thematised.
164 Particularly, the naturalisation process can be viewed as one, among others, contentious regulation. As mentioned in the literature review, the citizenship legislation changed in the year 2000, with the result that the bloodline, ius sanguinis, is no longer the only route to citizenship. However, due to the fact that the citizenship legislation in Germany does not accept dual nationality, particularly ethnic minority Turks are yet facing difficulties attempting naturalization. Hence only one quarter of ethnic minority Turks is naturalized. One could argue now that this sounds contradicting. Yes, it surely does, in particular considering the argument that in Germany naturalisation is seen as a major pillar on the route to a successful integration. It could be argued that it is not an accidental circumstance that the second largest ethnic minority group is facing difficulties attempting naturalization. Moreover, it could be argued that this citizenship regulation do exist in order to preserve the existent social order and power relations.
Nonetheless, a number of ethnic minority individuals have been naturalised in recent years. One could assume now that the problems that ethnic minority individuals face in allocating themselves to a collective German national identity vanish after obtaining the German citizenship. However, the findings suggest that even if an ethnic minority individual naturalises, he or she are still perceived as foreigner and as not truly belonging to the German nation-state by the majority group. According to social identity theory, individuals have both a personal and a collective or social identity. Thereby, social group membership influences not only how individuals perceive themselves but also how others perceive them (Roberts 1996). This means that identity can be both, attributed by others and achieved by self-identification (Jenkins 1996). Accordingly, Banton (1977, 1983) argues that the self-allocation to an ethnic group is the product of self-attribution and attribution by others. However, in particular the attribution by others has been absent in Germany and the social membership withheld. Germans do not consider ethnic minorities even if born in Germany as Germans and interview evidence indicates that also a naturalisation does not change this fact. Murat, an academic
165 and politician (male and of Turkish ethnicity), referring to the experience of a relative (of Turkish ethnicity) described the following situation:
My relative got the German citizenship. He was very happy about it and he went smiling to his boss to inform him about the change of citizenship. His boss only said I am not interested in that, you can have two, three or thousand German passports, for me you will always remain a Turk.
Ingeborg, a university professor in intercultural pedagogy (female, native-born German), providing a broader perspective on this issue said:
They are Germans, but they experience in everyday life, in all living spheres, beginning from the school, the pre school, the apprenticeship and at the entrance into the job, different forms of discrimination as ethnic others and this form of discrimination are evidenced not only assumptions. I am always attaching a lot of importance to that fact, because native-born Germans are usually very fast in saying that these are only feelings.
In view of that, it becomes obvious that native-born Germans consider ethnic minorities as foreign bodies and do not see ethnic minorities as a part of the nation-state. This manifests also in comments such as the following from Tina, an associate of a trade union (female and native-born German), saying that: “Ethnic minorities have to assimilate to the guest-culture”. Taking into account this comments, it appears that the idea that ethnic minorities have to be recognised as a part of the German nation has not found acceptance yet. While for instance the French tradition where the social and political contract takes priority over ethnic bonds and therefore “any man can (in theory) be turned into a Frenchman” (Sayad 2004: 219), Germans do not accept the idea that an immigrant can be turned into a German. I argue that this derives from the German understanding of nationhood, which has been Volk-centred and therefore race-centred.
166 Furthermore, long used terms describing ethnic minorities, such as for example the term guest worker, which only recently disappeared from the public and political debate, or the term foreigner which is still used, even for in Germany born ethnic minorities or naturalised individuals, shows that immigrants have never been and are yet not perceived as a part of the German nation. For instance, even now the government uses the term foreigner, describing non-naturalised ethnic minority individuals, in current research reports concerned with integration issues (see Babka von Gostomski 2010). However, in particular Germany’s long- standing denial of the status of an immigration country has led to many uncertainties and reservations on side of ethnic minorities.
This all does of course have an affect on the self-allocation of ethnic minorities. An earlier study that I carried out in the scope of my diploma dissertation, concerned with the state of integration of the second generation of the former guest-workers, showed that none of the fifteen interviewed participants self- allocated themselves as being German. Clearly, the self-allocation of ethnic minorities is only possible within the context and borders of the historical construction and definition of national identity and citizenship (Brubaker 1992; Castles and Miller 1998).
It could be argued that the current context and borders of the construction and definition of national identity and citizenship are too narrow, particularly considering the multi-ethic composition of the German society. In the case of Germany, we can see a context in which the construction of national identity and citizenship mainly derive from the believe of the existence of a German race. The roots of this believe lay in the past, partially in the German Nazi-past. However, the surprising part is that laws created through the Nazi-regime are still in force (Mandel 2004). This is, according to interview evidence, perceived as negative by ethnic minorities and prevents them to develop a feeling of belongingness in Germany. For instance Eleni, who is the editor of an online platform for diversity management from a political foundation (female and of Greek ethnicity), argues: “A lot of current legislation, which is actually preserved from the past prevents
167 ethnic minorities from a feeling of belonging in this country”. However, I argue that this laws need to be replaced by laws reflecting and acknowledging the current German nation-state, which does not consist only of native-born German citizens. It also necessary to allow the dual citizenship, which yet prevents at least two million people from fully participating, in terms of working possibilities as well as politically, in Germany. Finally, attention should be paid to issues of race discrimination. As shown above, experiencing discrimination has a major effect on the self-allocation of ethnic minority individuals in terms of national identity. Ignoring this issue seems to be a major omission as naturalisation alone does not guarantee the self-allocation to a national identity.
7.2.1 No political power for ethnic minority Turks
Ethnic minority Turks without German citizenship, and we speak here about around two million people, have been not conferred voting rights in Germany. Interview evidence shows that this is seen as a major problem in Germany, unsurprisingly only by ethnic minorities themselves. Interestingly, all interviewed diversity management stakeholders of Turkish ethnicity referred to this problematic when asked to answer a question regarding the exclusion of ethnic minorities in Germany. On the other side, German participants have not mentioned this once. Ali, a politician and associate of a welfare organisation (male and of Turkish ethnicity), for example said:
I understand under exclusion in particular the regulations regarding the voting right and the dual citizenship. For example, a French person can vote on the communal level after being three month in Germany, but a Turkish worker, who was working more then forty years under the earth in coal mine, he is not having a voice and cannot co-determine anything. He has to have a German passport. That is exclusion for me. We clearly do not belong to them.
168 Actually Ali refers in his comment to two implications, the voting right and the dual citizenship. Though that was the case for most comments regarding the voting right. Talking about voting right always happened in connection to the restriction of a dual citizenship, additionally referring to the fact that EU-members are excepted from this regulation. It appeared that ethnic minority Turks feel like ‘second class’ ethnic minorities compared with European ones. However, Cengiz, the founder of an online journal concerned with ethnic minority issues (male and of Turkish ethnicity), advising me during the interview to work with Bourdieuan theories, adds to Ali’s comment the following:
This might sound a little bit crazy, but you have to see the bigger picture. That is why I have been telling you to work with Bourdieu. It is about the distribution of power. There is a strategy behind. For example the voting right. I think it is very clear why we are not conferred voting rights here. It is about power, they don’t want to share the power.
Gülseren, a municipal integration delegate (female and of Turkish ethnicity), has a very similar opinion regarding this issues, but she goes further in adding that Germans see ethnic minorities as strangers in their country who suddenly:
Claim the same rights as Germans, as for example the communal voting right for Non-Europeans. This is a very hot topic, because it is about sharing power. It is about enviousness. One does not want to share power with the others. Because the perception that these people are already living in Germany for decades, yes this perception is simply missing.
These comments show that there is partly awareness of the underlying power relations in the society and also regarding the attempt on side of native-born German majority to preserve these power relations as there are. This complies with Bordieu’s (1992) point of view that structures, in this case the German citizenship law, exist merely to be deployed and adapted by agents seeking to establish their position and to preserve their existing status as well as power
169 relations. I do not argue that everybody is aware of this situation, however, according to these comments some are in fact. For example, some participants make in particular the CDU and the CSU responsible for the fact that Non- European citizens are still not conferred voting rights and that the dual citizenship is under restriction. Apparently, there is a truth about that. According to a recent study from the Berlin Market Research Institute, 55.5 per cent of ethnic minority Turks would, if they could, vote for the SPD, 23.3 per cent would vote for the green party and only 10.1 per cent for the CDU/CSU (DW-world.de 2009). In this regard, it is not surprising that the CDU and the CSU do not have any particular interest in conferring voting rights to Non- European citizens.
7.2.2 Ethnic minority Turks, excluded from working in civil service
As mentioned previously, ethnic minority participants named three implications for ethnic minorities deriving from the German citizenship law. In the following, we focus at the second one, the underrepresentation of ethnic minorities, in particular ethnic minority Turks, in civil service. In particular interviewed migrant representatives see this as a major problem. For instance, Cengiz, who is the founder of an online journal concerned with ethnic minority issues (male and of Turkish ethnicity), argues that the underrepresentation of ethnic minorities, particularly ethnic minority Turks, in civil service can be partly explained with the existing citizenship regulation:
They cannot choose a job, which requires the German citizenship. This can be a civil servant; there are many possible jobs, such as working for the police or the tax authority, or what ever. These jobs are all out of reach, just because of the missing citizenship. People with migration background can simply not chose these jobs.
Contrary, Murat, a politician and academic (male and of Turkish ethnicity), explains the underrepresentation of ethnic minorities in civil service with what he calls a German monoculture:
170 Intercultural competence is non-existing in such institutions, because there is a monoculture, a German monoculture, which cannot relate to this topic of including ethnic minorities.
Also Ricardo, an associate of a trade union (male and of Spanish ethnicity), makes the homogeneity of leadership in such institutions responsible for the underrepresentation of ethnic minorities in civil service:
The culture of organisations is very homogeny, and change where differences and diversity is allowed scares them and also they think that everything is going so well, so why to change anything?
On the contrary, most native-born German interviewees come to a different conclusion, making merely missing qualifications and weak language skills responsible for the underrepresentation of ethnic minorities in civil service. Accordingly Brigitte, an academic, diversity management trainer and consultant (female and native-born German), stated:
If you are aiming to get such a job you need to be able to speak a very good German. Though there are some foreigners which are able to speak German, you remember my former employee, you knew her, she got a good job at the Deutsche Bahn, but her German has been always perfect also her written German. Because she was a Russian and German teacher in Russia and for this it is necessary to speak a perfect German. But this is not always the case.
On the contrary, ethnic minority interviewees keep arguing that there are skilled ethnic minority individuals, which could do such jobs.
Despite all provided explanations of why the number of ethnic minorities in civil service is considerably low, it is a matter of fact that the official body in Germany is closed for none-German citizens. As mentioned in the in the chapter the tyranny
171 of history, the law responsible for this derives from Nazi-Germany. The "Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service" of April 7, 1933, which was thought in order to exclude Jewish and "politically unreliable" civil servants and employees from state service, is now excluding particularly ethnic minority Turks from working in civil service. It could be argued that the fact that this law has not been changed must not be seen as a simple coincidence. Once more it could be argued that it serves the preservation of existing status and power relations of those in power, which obviously are not ethnic minority individuals.
7.3 Integracism in employment. No need for race equality?
This section talks about integracism in the field of employment, as a mechanism of habitus that vanishes attempts of race equality, diversity management and anti- discrimination in Germany. This takes place in various ways. It starts with how the abilities of ethnic minorities across various job criteria are undermined by the majority group and goes further with the creation of criteria, which are then believed not to be met by ethnic minority workers, utilised to justify the exclusion of ethnic minority workers. The previous chapter, titled symbolic violence, outlined how symbolic violence against people of Turkish ethnicity manifests in Germany through everyday practice of symbolic elites. One could ask now, why it is necessary to go back to symbolic violence when talking about the integration of ethnic minorities into the labour market. It could be argued that the exercised symbolic violence and the mainstreamed manifestation of ethnic minorities being in deficit gives the basis for the notion of integration in Germany, bringing us closer to the concept of integracism.
Portraying ethnic minorities in a deficient way justifies applying integration concepts to these groups rather than concepts of anti-discrimination, race equality and diversity management. Why? Because according to the mainstream perception ethnic minorities are in need of training, for example to enter the job market or to attain educational credentials, rather than measures concerned with equality or anti-discrimination. For instance Weiß (2001) argues that such
172 practises of symbolic violence serve the manifestation of the notion that the entitlement of ethnic minorities for inclusion is not legitimate. That particular groups, namely ethnic minority Turks, are presented as having special needs regarding their integration shows clearly the racist notion of integration in Germany. Moreover, how can one aim for race equality in the labour market if ‘even qualifications are not equal’ between ethnic minorities and native-born Germans? According to Ingeborg, a university professor in intercultural pedagogy (female and native-born German)
The integration commissaries do not see their duty in preventing discrimination or in anti-discrimination measures, but rather they see their duties in let’s say in the integration of humans with migration background, to support them in a certain way and this is a different target. The goal is to lift the barriers for integration, which are rather seen in the persons themselves and not in the social circumstances. They hold the perspective that people with a migration background are hindering themselves, because of their family conditions, their life style, their upbringing conditions, linguistic competence, that means linguistic competence in the German language, from being integrated into the society, the political and employment system in Germany.
It was also shown in the previous chapter that not employing for instance workers of Turkish ethnicity is legitimated with internalised arguments referring to people of Turkish ethnicity being deficient across various job criteria. This deficit is particularly seen when referring to educational credentials held by ethnic minority individuals, particularly ethnic minority Turks. This is true to some extent; educational outcomes of some ethnic minority groups, particularly ethnic minority Turks, are far below the average of native-born Germans.
However, the in the mainstream debate most common argument is that ethnic minorities do lack fluency of German language, even if born in Germany in the second or third generation regardless of the educational background of the ethnic
173 minority individual. This argument is also strongly reflected in all interviews held with native-born German stakeholders in the scope of this study. Moreover, this imagination is also believed to be applicable for ethnic minority academics. For instance Brigitte, an academic, diversity management trainer and consultant (female and native-born German), legitimates the exclusion of ethnic minority academics in the labour market as following:
I know from my husband, who works at a University as a professor, that young persons with migration background often do not have a good written German, this is one reason, and for instance diploma dissertations are often counterchecked by others, that is logical, we would surely do this too if we would be in another foreign country, but logically if you are not even capable of writing a error free e-mail or business letter, what can I say, then it is over very fast. This is one reason. Another example is, I have a lot of schoolteachers in my circle of acquaintances, and they say that those which have a migration background, are not able to create a correct blackboard drawing in class and that I think is a barrier and I believe that if somebody with a academic background has the aspirations of taking a academic job, you need to be able to speak and write the German language.
This statement is interesting for different reasons. First of all, it is astonishing that Brigitte refers to ethnic minorities of being in another foreign country. Can this truly be said when talking about ethnic minorities in Germany? Certainly not, as a huge number of ethnic minorities are already born in Germany in the second and also third generation. What this comment shows is rather the majority perspective on ethnic minorities, which still views ethnic minority individuals as foreigners and therefore not as a part of German society. Additionally, viewing them as foreigners or non-Germans implies that these people need to put more, compared to native-born Germans, efforts into the fulfilment of common standards of for instance language proficiency, particularly when aiming for an academic career.
174 Secondly, we see that there is a strong believe that ethnic minority university students and academics are not capable of writing error free German. This is underpinned by the thought that ethnic minority students tend to let their diploma dissertation be counterchecked by others. It could be argued that this is in general a common practice, even for native-born Germans. There are numerous agencies in Germany offering editing services for diploma or doctoral dissertations. Besides, having difficulties with the German orthography and grammar seems to be not only a problem for ethnic minorities. For instance, several German Chambers of Handicraft complain that they are facing difficulties finding suitable trainees due to weak educational standards on side of school graduates, including weak German language skills. According to the Chamber of Handcraft of Hamburg, twenty percent of school graduates are in deficit. This problem applies particularly to Eastern Germany (Zamponi and Jessat 2010). One could think now that this could be explained by a high number of ethnic minorities in eastern Germany. However, the opposite is the case, Eastern Germany has with 2.4 percent the lowest number of ethnic minorities in Germany (Bundesamt für politische Bildung 2008).
Nevertheless, the mainstream debate is dominated by a discourse, which only views ethnic minorities of being in deficit. Certainly, this dominant discourse is influencing the stereotypes and perceptions held by persons responsible for hiring workers in organisations. An additional statement from Brigitte illustrates this issue clearly
What companies are telling me is that nothing goes without German language skills. There must be a better level than only rudimental knowledge of the German language, an ability to read but also a certain ability to write. That does not mean that a cleaning lady should be able to write novels, but she must be at least able to read a memo for instance. Thus this attitude, which we experienced for decades, why should I learn German, I just want to work, that does not work any more.
175 It appears that companies are negatively biased regarding the language skills of ethnic minorities. That is not astonishing, considering the mainstream debate regarding this issue. The same was observed in the case- study company, which will be discussed in more detail at a later point. However, this statement shows more. It shows that ethnic minority workers are mainly associated with low skilled labour. Brigitte refers immediately to a cleaning lady when talking about the language skills of ethnic minority workers.
Though, it is not only Brigitte holding such position. Peter, the head of a anti- discrimination NGO (male and native-born German), holds a similar position regarding the lack of sufficient language skills on side of ethnic minorities, particularly ethnic minority academics. He goes further suggesting how this assumed deficit could be dealed with
Though, I think if we stay in the area of academics, it has become thoroughly obvious that, ehm, if the mother tongue is not German, so ehm, that even so to say in the academic area, that there are problems in putting something into writing, there are deficits. But there could be measures targeting second language learning, such as writing concepts for academics with German as second language. Such things for example. That there are particular support measures, but with the goal to create upward mobility.
The interesting point of this statement is that Peter refers to the German language as a second language for ethnic minorities. This is rather surprising, considering that most of these individuals he is talking about have been born in Germany and went through the educational system in Germany and also graduated from a German university. How can one perceive the German language as a second language for ethnic minorities? According to Boos-Nünning (2005), the everyday life of young ethnic minority individuals must be described predominately as bilingual. Only eleven percent of ethnic minority youngsters are living in an environment, which is solely dominated by the German language. Contrary, only
176 seventeen percent of young ethnic minority individuals are growing up in a environment dominated by the language of the country of origin of their parents and this is particularly the case for newly arrived immigrants. Contrary to the mainstream perception, Boos-Nünning names girls of Greek ethnicity as the biggest group merely exposed to the language of the country of origin and not ethnic minority Turks. Considering that the educational attainment of ethnic minority Greeks is similar to that of native-born Germans, it could be questioned if the language argument can be made accountable for low educational and employment outcomes of ethnic minority Turks compared to native-born Germany.
However, the notion that the German language must be seen as the second language of ethnic minorities is yet dominant. Tina, a associate of a trade union (female and native-born German), supporting this idea and the idea that there is a need for measures targeting the assumed ethnic minority German language deficiency refers to a in this connection relevant governmental initiative
The initiative of the federal government concerned with the fostering of German language learning as second language is an important topic. Thus, ehm second language support at the workplace, in order to give persons with a migration background better employment prospects. This is very important.
It is not only Tina, who views such measure as important when aiming the integration of ethnic minorities in Germany. Over and over again, education and sufficient language skills are named as major factors for a successful integration in Germany, which is heavily reflected in the mainstream, the political debate as well as in the interviews of this study. For instance, also Elke, an academic and diversity trainer (female and native-born German) argues, “no integration without education.” Tanja goes further
177 The portion, which is highly or very good qualified, there I would say that the inclusion in the labour market and in the economy has been very successful. I think that these people have a very secure position in the labour market, because of their multiethnic education, whereas the others without sufficient education are the first ones to be standing on the street without a job.
Tanja believes that highly skilled ethnic minority workers are not facing any problems in the labour market and that their educational background guarantees their inclusion into the labour market. On the other hand, she believes that low skilled ethnic minority workers are at disadvantage due to their lack of educational credentials. Without any doubt, education can be seen as one major pillar for the successful integration of ethnic minorities into the labour market. For instance Skrobanek (2007:2) argues, “Successful educational and occupational integration will promote social integration, and this in turn will foster progress in education, training and employment”. The language issue whatsoever seems to be rather overrated. For instance, how is it possible that a significant number of foreign academics work in academic institutions all over the UK or the US, without English being their mother tongue?
Some even doubt the existence of language problems on the described level. For example Erkan, a head of a research centre and Lawyer (male and of Turkish ethnicity), argues:
I don’t believe that they can’t speak a proper German. These kids grew up in Germany. They have been socialised in Germany and they received their education here and I worked a lot with the youth. But what I believe is that there are certain stereotypes and prejudices, certain prejudices exist particularly through the media, which creates this picture steadily. The same as topics such as forced marriages, violent migrant youngsters and so on. Employers, those responsible for recruitment in a company don’t employ migrants as they see them as a risk factor for their company.
178 These are prejudices, an information deficit transported through the media.
A further comment regarding the debate concerned with German language skills of ethnic minority individuals comes from Tanja, a politician in a federal ministry (female and native-born German), which tries to explain why this issue is of such immense importance in the German context.
I can’t believe it; these are such moments, well this language discussion, that this is not moving forward at all, that makes me crazy. The language was the only thing that Germans had in common in the past. Germany consisted of different states, which were separated, the one part was Austria, the other part was in the direction of Prussia and the only thing they had in common was the language. I think we should rather start asking people what can you do and not starting to say from the beginning this is what you not are capable of.
However, even if there are language problems on such scale as repeatedly described in the mainstream media and debate, what is the German government doing to address this problem? Besides language courses targeting only immigrants newly entering the country, apparently not a lot. The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees offers mandatory integration courses to teach language, the legal system, culture, and history for new immigrants (which came after January 1, 2005), who are supposed of being unable to communicate in German but have been granted a residence permit. All others are only entitled to attend, but not required. Individuals who entered Germany before January 1, 2005 are not allowed to participate in an integration course, but might be permitted to take part upon request (Federal Law Gazette 2004). What we can see here is that despite that fact that language proficiency and educational credentials are seen as important to aid the better integration of ethnic minorities, measures are only created to integrate new entries. Particularly interesting is a recent statement from the Chancellor Angela Merkel
179 We should not be a country either which gives the impression to the outside world that those who don't speak German immediately or who were not raised speaking German are not welcome here. That would do great damage to our country. Companies will go elsewhere because they won't find the people to work here anymore (BBC 2010b).
In other words, her key message is that immigrants have to accept that, in particular, they need to learn the language.
Coming back to the lack of education argument, it could be asked what the German government is doing to address this problem. In truth the debate concerned with the lack of educational credentials of ethnic minority individuals remains only on the discourse level and comprehensive measures addressing this problem are missing. According to Bourdieu (1994) schools offer the key institutional setting for the production, transmission, and accumulation of the various forms of cultural capital. However, this does not mean that cultural capital is equally accessible for all groups in a society. The educational system is the instrument utilised to reproduce and preserve the existing order of a society and the power hold by the dominant group. He moreover argues that particularly educational credential markets have become a new key source of stratification in industrial societies by providing elementary recourses for status distinction among segments within upper- and middle-class group (Bourdieu and Boltanski 1977). However, the educational system in Germany with its three tiers goes further in providing not only status distinctions among segments within upper- and middle-class group, but also lower class distinctions.
Ethnic minority individuals born in Germany or living there for a long time, are yet facing difficulties attaining educational credentials. Educational outcomes of ethnic minorities, particularly ethnic minority Turks, are considerably lower compared to native-born Germans. This is unsurprising, as school students belonging to an ethnic minority are disadvantaged in the German three-tier system educational system for a long time now. For instance, primary school
180 teachers chose the type of high school, which they think is suitable for each individual school student (The Economist 2007). As a remark, only astonishing one to two percent of teachers in Germany belong to an ethnic minority. We can find a similar problem in Switzerland. For instance, Stadler (1999) argues that the mono cultural Swiss teaching stuff, exercises ethnocentric selection practices regarding ethnic minority school students. It could be argued that the same is happening in the case of Germany, where almost half of foreign students, and most ethnic minority children are channelled into the lowest educational tier of Hauptschule, which primarily prepares them for low-skilled jobs. However, only the highest tier the Gymnasium grants a diploma allowing them to go to university. Only fourteen percent of foreign students go to a pre-university Gymnasium, compared to the national average of more than twice that figure (International Crisis Group 2007). Additionally, ethnic minority children are overrepresented in schools for special education (European Comission 2008).
Despite the fact that the three-tier education system is subject to criticism for quite a while now, there are no serious attempts of changing it so far. According to Eleni, a editor of a online platform for diversity management of a political foundation (female and of Greek ethnicity)
This is one of the unresolved and unexplainable things happening here in Germany. Despite all criticism regarding the education system in Germany and its huge deficits, there is no attempt of changing this.
However, it is not alone the German three-tier system educational system, which disadvantages ethnic minority children. The three-tier system stemming from the times of Bismarck has been created back then to privilege the powerful in Germany, in preserving the social order through channelling people from different classes into different levels of professions. According to Bourdieu, “social inequality is rooted in objective structures of unequal distribution of types of capital” (Swartz 1997:145). The German education system is a very good example for such objectives structures, merely created to preserve the power of
181 the dominant group. Clearly, this school system must be seen as a major obstacle for ethnic minorities, disadvantaging them per se as they are often to find in the lower class of society.
However, as argued before it is not only the current school system preventing ethnic minorities, in particular ethnic minority Turks, from attaining educational credentials. For instance, several studies name institutional discrimination as one reason for the ‘educational failure’ of ethnic minorities and in particular Turks (Gomolla and Radtke 2002; Boos-Nünning 2003; Haas and Damelang 2007; European Commission 2008). Moreover, interview insights indicate a similar view. For instance Takuya, who is an academic and diversity trainer (male and of Japanese ethnicity), argues:
Young people, or lets say talented people with migration background, are excluded from education, because the German education system is a discriminatory process by itself.
Ingeborg, a university professor in intercultural pedagogy (female and native- born German), holding an analogous position adds
This people are a normal part of the society. However, it is not seen like that. There are Germans and other Germans, which experience in every part of everyday life discrimination. This starts at the school, the pre- school, the job training and when entering the job market. This different forms of discrimination as ethnic others are not an assumption there is evidence for it and I want to attach particular importance to that, because native-born Germans are always saying, this does not exist, this are only feelings. But this is not true there is evidence for that. This is proven for the school, there is for example a study, the IGLU study at school, which proves that those with a migration background are more rare transferred to the gymnasium, even if they have the same required qualifications.
182 As argued previously, there are several studies giving evidence for the existence of race discrimination in education and/or employment. It is argued that experiencing racial discrimination in education, training or employment can lead to a vicious circle of (re)ethnicisation, which results in further discrimination, and finally exclusion from employment (Skrobanek 2007).
Despite all this, the mainstream debate creates largely the impression that the reasons for the educational failure and the low attainment in the labour market of ethnic minority individuals are laying in the immigrant individual itself. For instance Esser (2003, 2006) argues that language barriers, a lack of interest in education, the family situation and background, supposedly a low educational background, are the major obstacles. For instance Esser (2006: 1) argues
… inequalities in term of access to education, income, central institutions, societal recognition and social contact are significantly, although not exclusively, determined by linguistic competence in the relevant national language.
This brings us back to Esser’s notion of integration, which as mentioned in the literature review, is the dominant notion of integration in the German context. Esser argues that the integration and therewith the assimilation of immigrants depends basically on the rational choice of the individual migrant and in how immigrants deal with the societal conditions they encounter. He argues that inequalities result for the most part due to the lack receiving-country social capital on side of the individual immigrants. Therefore, the immigrant individual needs to invest in education as “educational investments represent one core factor in the stabilization of ethnic inequalities” (Esser 2003: 23).
Contrary interview insights indicate that education alone does not guarantee the stabilisation of ethnic inequalities and neither the inclusion of ethnic minority workers into the labour market. Cem, who is the head of a research team, which is concerned with race related issues, notes
183 People with migration background, which successfully finish the gymnasium and successfully complete a university degree, are showing clearly that they have potential, but nonetheless it is difficult for them to access the labour market and they are much more often hit by unemployment.
Erkan, the head of a research centre (male and of Turkish ethnicity), adds
There is an automatism in the German integration debate; such as if you speak the German language you will be integrated. Who successfully goes through the education system will be integrated. But regarding in particular Turkish academics, with very very good German language proficiency and successful educational attainment we can also see that this people are yet not seen as integrated. In my view, German language proficiency and a higher educational degree only increase the chance of a successful integration into German society a little.
Additionally, the failure of ethnic minorities in the educational system is explained with for instance low educational backgrounds of parents. Such explanation does not seem to be a comprehensive assessment of the situation. According to Turgut, who is the head of a integration advisory board (male and of Turkish ethnicity), this is a rather questionable approach
If fifty percent of the migrant youth, despite the fact that they visited German schools for eight to nine years are nonetheless unable to write and read, ok you might can partially blame the parents for that, but if you are for eight to nine years at school and you don’t achieve it, well then there is something wrong with the system I would say.
Murat, an academic and politician (male and of Turkish ethnicity), shares this view and thinks this idea further
184 They are legitimising it, well of course its their own fault, well this legtimation, of course it is the Turkish mother which is to blame, the Turkish parents are to blame when the Turkish children do not have it good at school. For instance the numbers of the Berlin institute study and other studies, these studies are only verifying it, this is how the discussion goes. All outcomes from different studies, all theories serve only the purpose to detect exactly that, to detect that it is the others, which are to blame for this.
Murat’s comment is interesting as it not only displays the dominant discourse on the topic, but also shows how this discourse is created and underpinned with alleged objective statistics by the dominant group. Having in mind that it is solely the dominant group, which holds the power to carry out such studies and also to publish such studies, one needs to have very keen senses to understand that what we are seeing here is an unbalance in power. An unbalance in power that enables to create a majority perspective on ethnic minority issues which then only serves the goals of the dominant groups such as for instance the preservation of the existent order and structure of German society.
Considering these insights, it becomes questionable if talking about rational choice regarding the attainment of for instance educational credentials is of any help when attempting to aid the better integration of ethnic minority workers into the labour market. It could be argued that there is a need to consider that education, skills, experience and qualifications are not equally accessible across socio-demographic lines. Instead, the organisation of education, work and life continues to privilege the powerful. Also the existence of race discrimination in education in Germany should be considered. It is questionable if the attainment of educational credentials leads automatically to the inclusion of ethnic minorities into the labour market.
For instance, Esser states “(visible) ethnic membership exacerbates the situation by counting as a (negative) symbol for the actual value of an educational
185 certificate” (2003: 23). At the first sight, this looks promising. It seems as there is an acknowledgement of the existence of race discrimination in the German society. However, he then further states that ethnic disadvantages should soon vanish if certain ethnic minority groups accomplish to appoint a special value of their own to education and ensure high success rates through family structures. As an example he refers to Jewish immigrants and Asian in the US (Esser 2003). Clearly, the latter comment brings the responsibility for integration back to the ethnic minority individual.
In this context, it could be argued that Esser overlooks the importance of factors such as race discrimination, racism and power relations, which are blocking to some extent the inclusion of ethnic minorities into the labour market as well as the attainment of educational credentials. Moreover, he not only overlooks power relations and race discrimination in general, he also overlooks his own racial bias regarding his notion of integration. For instance, in 2003 he argued in a working- paper entitled “Does the new immigration require a new theory of intergenerational integration?” that intergenerational integration (as theorised for example by Park in 1950) seems no longer to be simply a matter of time and sequences of generations for certain groups.
However, in talking about certain groups he only refers to Turkish immigrants. For instance he states, based on research of Granato and Kalter (2001) that while the professional mobility is increasing for all immigrants this does not apply to Turkish immigrants. In that he sees a significant nationality effect, which does not vanish in the second generation of Turkish immigrants, which is the case for all other immigrant groups. He then tries to explain this based on, compared to other ethnic groups, different patterns of Turkish immigrants regarding interethnic friendship and identification with the receiving country, bringing it back to his rational choice notion of integration and the unwillingness to integrate of ethnic minority Turks. Then again, he misses to connect the poor outcomes of ethnic minority Turks with for instance race discrimination in employment or education. This can be described as a major omission, as for instance relevant
186 research suggests that the tendency towards (re)ethnicisation should not be interpreted as merely a lack of willingness to integrate. It is rather the case that the (re)ethnicisation becomes an attractive alternative for young ethnic minority Turks, who encounter discrimination in their every day life including discrimination in education and employment (Skrobanek 2007).
In conclusion, it can be said that this connection of race discrimination and existent racial inequality, or in German words the lack of integration of ethnic minority groups, is missing entirely and this is one of the major problems in the integration debate in Germany. For instance Ingeborg, who is a university professor in intercultural pedagogy (female and native-born German), describes this in one of her comments precisely
They avoid the discussion regarding discrimination in constantly talking about ethnic minorities being in deficit. This is very simple, in creating pseudo criteria and in never talking about the good students for example, which do not get a job or trainee position, rather we talk always about the bad ones the ones that cannot speak German or that have other problems and we also never talk about those which cannot get a job at the university, simply because they belong to an ethnic minority, and the tricky thing is that they are not even talking about ethnicity as a criteria but instead they are saying that this and this criteria is not met. This is used as legitimation for not employing them. They would always say that migrants just do not get the jobs because they do not fulfil the requirements, because they do not speak enough German and so on. Nobody talks about ethnic discrimination, nobody.
Ingeborg argues that avoiding the topic of discrimination and rather focussing on assumed deficits on the side of ethnic minorities is utilised as legitimation for not employing them. This sounds like a reasonable explanation, but it could be argued that this practice not only serves the legitimation of exclusion, but also serves simply avoiding national guilt regarding the German Nazi-past, as
187 described in earlier chapters of this thesis. It appears that this process is of a rather complex nature, which needs to be investigated further. However, avoiding talking about the role of the dominant group for the integration process results also into the fact that efforts to aid the better integration of ethnic minority individuals are solely burdened on ethnic minority individuals themselves (Sayad 2004). Rational choice is the magic word. If one wants, he or she will be integrated. Any existent obstacles blockading this process are to find in the ethnic minority individual itself. Following this single sided logic, it is then easy to say that particular groups, namely those with very poor outcomes, are particularly unwilling and unable to integrate. In blaming particular groups for their poor integration outcomes, this view gives the basis for racism, a racism making the integration process even more difficult. It sounds like an invincible circle, which means that particular groups, namely ethnic minority Turks, are not only discriminated and patronised, they are on top of it blamed for it. According to Ofner (2010) it would be fatal to ignore the exclusionary mechanisms and to view the problems of ethnic minorities as self-inflicted. It is obvious that particularly ethnic minority Turks are facing discrimination, everyday discrimination but also deep-rooted structural discrimination. Thereby, ironically ethnic minority Turks are not seen as the victims of such circumstances but rather as the cause of problems in integrating them. Certainly this circle needs to be broken.
7.4 Where are the highly skilled ethnic minority workers in Germany? Through the eyes of ethnic minority members
The previous section described the dominant perspective on the topic of integration in Germany. Most interviews with stakeholders of native-born German origin see the reasons for the poor integration of some ethnic minority individuals mostly in themselves. Moreover, it became obvious that these native- born German interviewees refer mostly to under-qualified ethnic minority individuals when referring to ethnic minority workers in general. It was also shown that even if referring to highly qualified ethnic minority workers this was always coming along with doubts regarding their abilities, particularly regarding their German language proficiency. Altogether, ethnic minority workers have
188 been presented in a deficient way, regardless their educational credentials. This is rather unsurprising, as what we can see here must be described as a simple reflection of the dominant perspective and discourse on issues concerned with ethnic minority workers.
When looking at the insights generated from some interviews with stakeholders belonging to an ethnic minority, the whole topic appears in a very different light. Some refer here to the fact that while some ethnic minority stakeholders adopted the dominant view on the topic as described in the chapter concerned with symbolic violence, others view the topic in a very different light. The only two native-born German stakeholders sharing the displayed perspective are those who are actually working on issues of race discrimination rather than on diversity management. However, this perspective is particularly interesting and important, as the interviewees belonging to an ethnic minority must be described all as highly skilled workers, who according to the mainstream perception do not exist. Therefore, considering this perspective gives the possibility to gain insights about how highly skilled ethnic minority workers perceive the situation of ethnic minority workers and the debate regarding race related issues in the German context. This perspective is also important and interesting as it is a perspective that is ignored in the mainstream discourse so far.
Overall, all interviewed ethnic minority stakeholders agree on the point that education and German language proficiency alone do not guarantee race equality in employment. Mustafa, a member of a governmental department (male and of Turkish ethnicity), argues:
A higher education creates better chances, but a higher education does not automatically lead into a better integration on the labour market. The resistance gets greater in higher social classes. Well the problems of distribution are getting bigger when the resources, particularly in the upper peak are getting scantier. Well, in particular the people which are
189 aware of it and which have the chance and the potential to emigrate, they are doing it. They do not bother themselves with this situation.
A similar statement comes from Eleni, who is the editor of an relevant online platform for diversity management (female and of Greek ethnicity):
It is the case that even good educated and qualified young ethnic minority individuals do not get access to the labour market. Well and many are going abroad now and are leaving Germany. Yes, this is a fact. So the exclusion from the labour market is not only connected with the qualifications, even competent ones have problems. There is simply a problem with the attitude towards migrants on side of the majority group and the unemployment rate of academics with migration background is, compared to the majority group, much higher. So, education does not lead automatically to labour market integration. It is important requirement but not the only one. The essential requirement would be that the majority group opens up to the fact that our society is diverse and that this diversity comes along with potential, a potential, which is also a benefit for the majority group. As I said, the acknowledgement of diversity as a value.
Both statements show an agreement regarding the importance of education for the inclusion of ethnic minorities. However, a further agreement is to be found regarding the fact that education alone does not guarantee the labour market inclusion of ethnic minority workers. While the mainstream debate in Germany is dominated by the idea that education is the main key aiding the better integration of ethnic minority workers, research outside Germany proofs contrary. For instance Wrench (2001) argues that in most European countries ethnic minority individuals suffer from labour market marginalisation in comparison with their majority national peers, even with fluency of language and equal educational credentials. This shows that focussing solely on the education issues is not sufficient aiming the inclusion of ethnic minority workers. Unsurprisingly, the interviewed stakeholders belonging to an ethnic minority explain racial inequality
190 and marginalisation in employment not solely with a lack of educational credentials or German language fluency, contrary to native-born stakeholders. The mode of explanation focuses rather on issues such as racial discrimination, competition and power and lastly the effects of symbolic violence. While racial discrimination has been named as an obstacle for ethnic minority workers by some of the native-born German stakeholders, issues of competition, power and the effects of symbolic violence remained unpronounced.
The first topic of racial discrimination refers to the fact that racial discrimination must be seen as a major obstacle for ethnic minority workers. As described in previous chapters, the issue of race discrimination is largely ignored in the mainstream and political debate. Nonetheless, empirical evidence of discrimination against ethnic minority workers in the labour market exists, despite the fact that there is no comprehensive data collection regarding race discrimination in the German labour market (Goldberg et al. 1996; Peucker 2006; Bosch et al. 2007; ECRI 2009; Eurobarometer 2009; Kass and Manger 2010).
For instance Gülderen, who is a associate of the federal chamber of commerce (female and of Turkish ethnicity), makes racial discrimination responsible for ethnic minority workers not being in leadership positions or higher academic positions even if highly skilled.
The question is now, the higher the qualification, though if you have a higher education; do you have then really the chance to work in a comparable position? If I have a qualification as a baker, then I can work here surely as a baker, but lets say if I have a qualification as a professor, can I have a professorship here? Or if I have the qualification to be a Chief Executive Officer can I be a Chief Executive Officer? I do not think so. This is because of discrimination.
Clearly Gülderen views race discrimination as the reason for the labour market marginalisation of ethnic minority workers. If discrimination is the reason why
191 ethnic minority workers are not to find in leadership positions is difficult to answer. As described in previous chapters, there is a lack of data regarding discrimination cases in Germany. Additionally, literature on highly skilled ethnic minority workers is nearly absent, which makes it impossible to locate highly skilled ethnic minority workers in the labour market. It would be of interest to know how many ethnic minority workers are in leadership positions, if any.
However, not only race discrimination is viewed as accountable for the labour market marginalisation of highly skilled ethnic minority workers. A further raised issues is the lack of social capital, namely networks on side of ethnic minority workers. According to Bourdieu social capital consists of two components, it is connected with group membership and social networks. "The volume of social capital possessed by a given agent ... depends on the size of the network of connections that he can effectively mobilize" (Bourdieu 1986: 249). It is a value produced by the sum of the relationships between actors, rather than merely a common "quality" of the group (Bourdieu 1980: 2). For instance Jasmin, who is the head of a mentoring program for female ethnic minority academics (female and of Afghan ethnicity), argues:
I think that networks play a very important role, why people with migration background cannot get access to particular jobs, because the networks are missing and as we know networks are necessary in order to get particular jobs. We surely know that (she laughs saying this).
Elke, an academic and diversity trainer (female and native-born German), sharing this opinion, explains further and relates social capital to the exclusion of highly skilled ethnic minority workers
Yes, education is precondition, but there are also other relevant factors playing a role such as networks. The exclusion happens through networks and knowledge and access to networks. Connections enrich human
192 capital, by just using connections to get the better job, the better internship, etc.
Membership in groups, involvement in social networks and the social relations arising from such memberships can be utilised in efforts to improve the social position of the actors in a variety of different fields. Modern examples of such groups are for example trade unions, political parties or secret societies, which all embody social capital. Group memberships, which generate social capital, have a multiplication effect on the influence of other forms of capital. However, according to Elke’s statement such networks can be also utilised to exclude for instance ethnic minority workers from fully participating in the labour market.
Ingeborg, a university professor for intercultural pedagogy (female and native- born German), underlines Elke’s argument and thinks it further in relating it to Bourdieu’s work
In my opinion they are clearly blocking people with migration background, because it is about reproduction, it is always about reproduction. This means that these institutions are reproducing their young generation, and now you can relate to Bourdieu. They come up with indistinct criteria and alleged attributes that people should hold and utilise these criteria in order to exclude people with migration background and to secure the process of reproduction. A second important point are networks, in form of relationships, which bring in their own interests into this process and with this, migrants which are not involved in networks such as Germans, but also do not fulfil this alleged attributes that people should hold, have from the beginning only poor chances of getting a job after a university degree. After all, the unemployment rate of people with a migration background and a university degree is significantly higher. It is particular difficult for those resident migrants with quasi-native education and a German university degree. Always, as better they are, the more difficult it is for them.
193 Ingeborg, as before Elke, argues that networks are utilised in order to exclude highly skilled ethnic minority workers and also utilised to preserve and reproduce the existent social order. This is only possible because there are differences in the control of social capital. This explains why the same amount of economic and cultural capital can yield different degrees of profit, and different powers of influence to different actors (see Bourdieu 1986; Joppke 1987; Coleman 1988). For Bourdieu each individual occupies a position in a multidimensional social space; he or she is not defined only by social class membership, but by every single kind of capital he or she can articulate through social relations. Social capital includes the value of social networks, which Bourdieu showed could be used to produce or reproduce inequality (Bourdieu 1977).
This brings us to the last point of this section. As mentioned above, there are differences in the control of social capital. Accordingly, the interplay of competition for power and discrimination is made responsible for the labour market exclusion of ethnic minority workers by the interviewees. For instance Bourdieu sees
… competitive struggle as representing the fundamental dynamic of all social life. Individuals, families, and groups struggle to maintain or improve their relative market positions within the stratified social order. Competition occurs over valued forms of capital, and over definitions of what is legitimate capital” (Swartz1997: 180).
Cengiz, the head of a online journal concerned with ethnic minority issues (male and of Turkish ethnicity), talks about his experience in academia and gives us a first impression regarding the issue of competition in relation to the labour market marginalisation of ethnic minority workers
It is easy to get low skilled jobs, which are unpopular among Germans. For example such jobs that the guest workers took. If you want of course to get the same job positions and if you want to get higher job positions,
194 well I worked at a university in Germany and I have, well I was relatively alone there and I have heard from many job interviews, well internal staff that for example professorships even if they were in the intercultural area at universities, that they do not staff this positions with people with
migration background.
A further comment from Murat, an academic and politician (male and of Turksih ethnicity), makes the whole point clearer
It is about power, because, ehm of course at some point migrants do not want only to clean toilets, but rather they also want to have better jobs where they can take decisions and then they come into competition with the German job applicants and the sooner you thwart migrants, as better you can keep your own position. That is why a lot of the elites, particularly the Turkish elites, are emigrating. Because they do not see any perspectives here and that is clearly about discrimination, not to be accepted and not to feel good here, to not have a feeling of being welcome. This is strongly present. One should have a look at how many migrants are in decision making positions, or how many migrants are working in public service, that can be counted on the fingers of one hand.
Murat and Cengiz both refer to the fact that the profile of ethnic minority workers has changed. While in the past ethnic minority workers were recruited as guest workers in order to fill low-skilled positions, this has changed recently. Nowadays ethnic minority workers do not consist only of low-skilled workers, but also of high skilled workers. Such highly skilled ethnic minority workers, have of course different aspirations, they want higher qualified jobs. However, he then states that particularly ethnic minority Turks do not have any perspectives in this regard, as they are finding themselves in direct competition with native-born Germans, which additionally hold the power to distribute such jobs. Cengiz describes similar circumstances for the academic sector. He argues that higher academic positions are not given to ethnic minority academics even if qualified.
195 Moreover, he describes feelings of loneliness in the university he has been working, which might be reasoned in the fact that only a small number of ethnic minority academics are working in academia in Germany.
However, as a native-born German stakeholder only Ingeborg, the professor of intercultural pedagogy (female and native-born German), mentioned the issue of competition, which is very interesting as it gives us an idea about how native- born Germans perceive being in competition with highly skilled ethnic minority workers.
If they are good then they are facing discriminating mechanisms. Nowadays, when you are in discussions with migrants elites are appearing, which are equal to native-born Germans, and partially even better. Due to that it is coming quasi naturally to a new competition and conflict and I do not think that the native German society is prepared for this and I think that they have currently immense problems with this. It would be much easier for them if they still have the old circumstances. That is to say that the migrants are working meek as a mouse as guest worker, yes and not like today with the principle of justice or even claiming the principle of justice, yes you have to say, yes suddenly making demands towards the German society and then there are some native Germany supporting this, yes but not really a lot to be honest. Clearly it is about the preservation of power, for me it is clearly about the preservation of power and the fight for resources, which then lead to discrimination.
Ethnic minorities have been classified as guest worker in the past. Guest worker, which only stay temporary and only occupy low skilled jobs. According to Bourdieu (1984), such classifications must be understood as social classifications, which serve to rank individuals and groups in the stratification order. Such symbolic distinctions dictate a sense of place in the existent social order, which fulfils the social closure functions of inclusion and exclusion. In the moment
196 were an individual or group tries to break through this existent social order in leaving the dictated sense of place conflict occurs in the form of a struggle for power and resources. As Ingeborg describes in the above statement, it is clearly about the preservation of power and the existing social order.
Despite the fact that the former classification is not applicable anymore, which means that nowadays it is not realistic to view all ethnic minority workers as a groups of low skilled workers, this classification remains maintained by the dominant group. This is done in order to legitimate the exclusion of highly qualified ethnic minority workers from higher positions in the labour market. The crucial point is that only the dominant group holds the power to produce such classifications (Bourdieu 1984). Thereby, symbolic violence plays a vital role in maintaining such symbolic distinctions. However, how such classifications are maintained and produced is displayed in a further statement of Ingeborg
It is about competition and the easiest way to preserve competition is in disqualifying and this disqualification is happening in a very subtle way. Well, if you read the newspaper three weeks ago about how poor the Turks are and you saw the micro census, the Berlin Institute which churned up the micro census data from 2005 and interpreted it totally wrong, totally wrong, but this is the atmosphere. Anyway, by now even the last German has the opinion that Turks are poor, that they are not able of doing anything and in such an atmosphere, in such a society they do not let them come through.
This study from the Berlin Institute has been discussed in the previous chapter titled symbolic violence. It has been shown that such studies are utilised in order to classify particular groups, namely ethnic minority Turks, as being in deficit. Such practice of symbolic violence evidently dominate the mainstream debate and the outcome is that the exclusion of highly skilled ethnic minority workers gets legitimised in this way, as symbolic distinctions are simultaneously social distinctions. Due to this practice ethnic minority workers are stigmatised of being
197 in deficit and therefore, as mentioned before, not entitled for race equality on the labour market, but rather in the need of supportive integration measures. The following statement from Jasmin, the head of a mentoring program (female and of Afghan ethnicity), makes it clear for one more time.
Ethnic minority workers in higher positions! I think there are a lot of stereotypes and prejudices, which play a role and also this deficit approach, so that they rather proceed from the notion that people with migration background are deficient for real. That they do not have good German language skills or ehm not so good methodical and didactical skills. I think there are a lot of prejudices, which hinder that ethnic minority workers can make progress.
So what is the outcome of integracism in employment? Asking the question of where are the highly skilled ethnic minority workers in Germany and investigating the mainstream debate, leaves only one possible answer: they simply do not exist. This does not mean that they do not exist in reality; it refers rather to the fact that their existence is denied in the mainstream debate as well as in the political debate. There is rather a focus on ethnic minorities described as in deficit and unwilling and unable to integrate. What is needed now, if ones takes the inclusion of ethnic minority workers seriously, is a change of classification of ethnic minority workers. One should look more carefully at this group, which consists of people from very diverse background, which includes also diverse educational backgrounds. This applies particularly to ethnic minority Turks, which seemingly are the most disadvantaged group. This change of classification of ethnic minority workers has to happen quite fast, considering that a number of highly skilled ethnic minority workers left the country already (Futureorg 2009), which is rather unsurprising considering the above described circumstances. As the chancellor Angela Merkel said at the integration conference in 2008: “We cannot abstain a single talent in our society”. A first step would be to acknowledge that talent is not a solely native-born German attribute.
198 7.5 Conclusions
This chapter demonstrates that what we are viewing is a cooptation of the notion of integration with the purpose of setting norms of national identity, which naturalises inequities of the contemporary racial order in organisation and management of immigration, which remains the last uncontested bastion of racial bias. At the same time the issue of equal opportunities at work remains uncontested and ignored in Germany. In the case of Germany, integration measures and policies are utilised to aid the ‘better integration’ of ethnic minorities instead of, for example, diversity management or measures regarding equal opportunities at work. Ethnic minority workers, particularly ethnic minority Turks, which is a very strong sign of racial bias, are constantly portrayed as in deficit compared to native-born Germans. For that reason, ethnic minority workers are not in the need of equal opportunities at work, but rather in the need for special support in order to be integrated, to be ‘helped’ by the majority group. Simply said, ethnic minorities are not seen as equal and therefore, there is no need for equal opportunities at work. However this seems to be a common practice not only in Germany. Many western European countries including Germany try to explain racial inequalities with weaknesses of the immigrants such as an insufficient educational performance and qualifications, weakly developed language skills of the local language, low educated parents and cultural and ethnic differences (Wrench 2001).
A further similarity among Western countries is that the dominant group of a society usually defines the notion of integration as well as the content and goals of governmental integration policies. Furthermore, it is a matter of fact that the discourse regarding the integration of ethnic minorities, as well as the development of governmental integration policies, is based on an unequal balance of power. The majority society holds the power to decide what a debate consists of and sets also the rules and goals of integration policies. Ethnic minorities thereby “are remembered only in order to criticize them, to criticize them for their bad assimilation; that is their fault, while good assimilation is to the credit and the profit of the assimilating society” (Sayad 2004: 220). In Germany for instance, there is nearly no research available studying the issue if integration from an ethnic minority perspective, so to say from the perspective of those, who are meant to be integrated and assimilated. According to Bourdieu (2004), the migration and hence integration literature is predominantly focused on how the majority society perceives and deals with immigrants as a source of potential problems. He argues that analysts approach immigration
… from the point of view of the host society, which looks at the ‘immigrant’ problem only insofar as ‘immigrants’ cause it problems, they in effect fail to ask themselves about the diversity of causes and reasons that may have determined the departures and oriented diversity of the trajectories (Bourdieu 2004: xiii).
This is only possible because the majority group defines the notion of integration, in a process of collective interaction, or as Layder (1993) would verbalize in a process of social activity, which serves collective intentions and objectives, such as to manipulate and control ethnic minorities. As a result, issues such as race discrimination remain unchallenged. It could be argued that it is time to rethink the notion of integration in Germany, considering the low educational achievements and the poor employment situation of ethnic minorities. The question is now if the inclusion of ethnic minority workers is truly wanted, or if for instance the government is only paying lip service in addressing this problem. Definitely the integration record in Germany must be described as unsatisfying so far. In order to change the notion of integration in Germany it is essential to first of all change the discourse concerned with ethnic minority issues. According to Hall (1988), discourse constitutes social and political life. Hence the constitution of objects is socially organised and highly depended on our forms of discourse and past discursive history. In processes of “definition and articulation and the means through which one version of objects becomes established and alternative undermined” (Wetherell and Potter 1992: 64). In the case of Germany, the discourse concerned with race related issues is utilised in form of symbolic
200 violence exercised upon ethnic minorities. The dominant group defines and describes ethnic minority workers in a deficient manner, which undermines the diverse experiences professional qualifications. For instance, highly skilled ethnic minority workers are simply non-existent, which clearly is not the case. This applies particularly to ethnic minority Turks. Due to this practice highly skilled ethnic minority workers experience symbolic exclusion in Germany. In the light of recent debates such as the so-called war of talent, this seems to be a rather shortsighted approach. It is to anticipate that such practices have an enormous effect on ethnic minority workers. As mentioned above, some ethnic minority Turks already left Germany and others might follow.
If thinking of inclusion seriously, one would have to modernise the school system. First of all, schools infuse the dominant systems of classification through which symbolic power is expressed (Bourdieu 1967). Secondly, the three-tier structure of the German school system presents a major omission for ethnic minorities attempting to attain educational credentials. However, the modernisation of the education system is not only important regarding ethnic minorities, generally students coming from lower classes of the society are at disadvantage. Facing challenges such as labour shortages and demographic change requires the optimal development of existing human recourses. Therefore, it is particularly crucial to change the German education system in the near future.
A further change should be done regarding the restrictive German citizenship laws, which for instance prevent ethnic minorities from political participation. This should go hand in hand with rethinking the traditional notions of national identity. The fact that dual citizenship is not allowed in most instances may prove to be a long-term obstacle to effective inclusion, particularly for ethnic minority Turks. For instance Boyer (2009: 22) argues:
The lack of a dual citizenship option leads many with immigrant backgrounds to believe that they must choose between the lesser of two
201 evils: being officially German but a second-class citizen, or maintaining another nationality and residing in Germany without full citizenship rights.
Further steps should focus on discrimination in the workplace and on socioeconomic inequality, which are also major barriers to effective inclusion. A recent study from the Bertelsmann Foundation estimated that unsuccessful immigration practices are costing Germany up to $20 billion per annum (Elger et al. 2009). Additionally, Germany simply cannot afford anymore to ignore highly skilled ethnic minority workers. Clearly, the denial of their existence and the labour market discrimination they are facing is contra productive. Highly skilled ethnic minority workers started leaving Germany for more promising destinations, and many others are seriously considering this move too. Labour shortages, demographic change and a global race for talent should be incentive enough to consider the above proposed changes.
Lastly and most important if changes are made, this should not happen without including ethnic minorities themselves into that process. As described above, the notion of integration lays solely in the hands of the dominant group, leading to the described negative outcomes. Including ethnic minorities into the development of for instance measures regarding race equality would probably help avoiding racial bias and would bring such measures closer to the real problems faced by ethnic minorities.
202 Chapter Eight
Analysis III: Diversity management in Germany, in the context of field, habitus and agency
8.1 Introduction
This chapter is set out to give an account of the field, the organisational habitus and the agency of diversity management in Germany, with a particular focus on the management of ethnic diversity, as explained in the conceptual framework, which was proposed earlier. Since this chapter tackles all levels of analysis, macro, meso and micro level, as well as the relations between these levels, this chapter is the most extensive chapter of this thesis.
Drawing on thirty stakeholder interviews, the first section outlines the field of diversity management in Germany in providing an explanation of how the struggle for power and existing power relations shape the field of diversity management in Germany as well as its agenda. In drawing on case study company data, the second part of this chapter attempts to give an understanding of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity and tackles therefore the meso-level of analysis. In order to do so, this section starts with an introduction of the MNC under scrutiny, including a description of the company in its current form, the history of the company, the organisational structure of the company and the global diversity management approach of the company. This is then followed by a description of the MNC’s subsidiaries located in Germany, which includes a description of the workforce structure of the German plants and a description of the human resource department of the German plants. The latter two points are important as they show that this company does not employ a significant number of ethnic minority workers and it is shown that the Human Resources department consists only of native-born German employees. The next section examines the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity of the German subsidiary.
203 The company case study data suggests that an organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity is absent in this company. For this reason this section is attempting to give possible explanations for the absent organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity. The section ends in giving account to the employee experience of diversity management in the German subsidiary, showing that there is no such experience in the company under investigation. The next section discusses the agency of diversity management stakeholder and shows how the tyranny of history, namely the collective national guilt of post-Holocaust Germany, has shaped the framework of diversity management in Germany and hence the agency of diversity management stakeholders in such a way that race related issues have been excluded from the diversity management agenda and debate. Lastly, the chapter provides a conclusion.
8.2 The field of diversity management in Germany
This section examines the field of diversity management in Germany. The theoretical concept field stands for the widespread field of society and can be operationalised in order to explain the environment and rules; so-called “objective structures” within class struggles are taking place (Bourdieu 1990). Hence, the concept field includes the pertaining social dynamics, influences such as social and industrial regulations, legislation, social norms, values and culture and power relations (Bourdieu 1990). According to Bourdieu “field analysis calls attention to the social conditions of struggle that shape cultural production” (Swartz 1997:119). Furthermore, scrutinising the field of diversity management in Germany brings us to research question one. Hence, this section gives account to the macro context of diversity management in Germany. Ely and Thomas (2001: 237) pointed out „how context might shape people’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviours ... and how these, in turn, might influence the role of cultural diversity in the work group’s functioning …“. Regarding this, the examination of the diversity management field will possibly give us insights about how the macro context is influencing organisational diversity management programmes in terms of ethnicity. Rather than presenting a broad overview of the entire diversity
204 management field, this section is set out to provide an understanding of how the struggle for power and existing power relations shape the field of diversity management in Germany as well as its agenda.
The diversity management field in Germany is yet in an early stage of development. At such early stage issues such as the struggle for power and power relations are of vast interest, as they have a particular influence on how the current and future diversity management field, as well as the diversity management agenda will be shaped. Moreover, investigating the diversity management field in Germany brings us back to significant themes raised in the literature review on diversity management in the German context. These themes are that diversity management is not about the elimination of discrimination, particularly in terms of ethnicity, and the fact that the gender issue and gender scholars dominate not only the scientific discourse on diversity management (see Koall and Bruchhagen 2002; Hermes and Rohrmann 2006; Krell 2008), but also the diversity management field in Germany. Before concentrating on issues mentioned above, this sections starts with a brief overview of the diversity management field in Germany.
Drawing on interview evidence and relevant literature it comes into sight that the diversity management field in Germany can be described as a relatively underdeveloped and unstructured field. Along with this, the notion of diversity management lacks a consistent definition as well as clear objectives and targets. Despite the rising number of institutions and different stakeholders which do engage with the diversity management concept, such as for example trade unions, consultancies, lawyers, academics, the government, organisations, etc., the field appears to be relative unconnected, without clear responsibilities and also without influential decision makers, if for instance compared with the fields of diversity management in the UK and/or US. It is difficult to trace influential and powerful stakeholders and it is difficult to find clear connections and collaborations between them. There are some connections and collaborations between academics working in the field of diversity management, but there are no relevant
205 connections and collaborations between for example academia and organisations. One of the more clear connections and collaborations is to be found between the government and different organisations, which come together under the banner of the governmental diversity Charta. However, even the Federal Anti- Discrimination Authority does not play any particular role in the field and is only present through its Internet presence.
Moreover, interview evidence suggests that NGO’s focusing on issues such as race discrimination do not view diversity management as a suitable instrument in combating race discrimination. Taking a rather critical standpoint towards the concept of diversity management, NGO’s concerned with race related issues are not part of the diversity management field. The main point of criticism is that the concept of diversity management dilutes particularly the existence of structural discrimination. For instance Özlem, the head of a anti-discrimination NGO (female and of Turkish ethnicity), argues:
I see diversity management as a very superficial concept, as it does not question social structures and this is what is missing in my view. Structural discrimination is not considered at all and the concept is taken over totally uncritical and without any reflection.
This criticism is very similar to criticism raised in the British context, where the dilution of discrimination (particularly forms of structural and institutional discrimination) and inequality is viewed as the problematic issue in relation to the concept of diversity management (Kersten 2000; Wrench 2005; Kirton and Green 2006). Forms of discrimination are mostly only recognised in relation to women equality. For instance Elke argues, “The gender topic is always thought off in relation to discrimination”. On the contrary, issues such as race discrimination and racism are not considered in the German context and hence not part of the notion of diversity management. One reason for the absence of such topics might be the fact that NGO’s working on race related issues are not part of the diversity management field. They have their own field, which is marked by little
206 governmental support and therefore, very limited resources. However, due to their absence in the field of diversity management serious attempts to advocate the consideration of race related issues in the diversity management debate are absent too.
Unmistakably the field of diversity management can be described as being in an early phase of development in the German context, particularly in terms of managing ethnic diversity. Accordingly, most interviewed stakeholders describe the state of the debate concerned with diversity management as yet in early stages and superficial. For example Eleni, the editor of a online journal concerned with diversity management (female and of Greek ethnicity), describes the state of diversity management as follows:
I think that diversity management is a concept that only recently starts to gain ground, or rather starts to come into discussion, being up to date and fashionable, but yet, if one can say it so, it does not go beyond a symbolic character, nothing else, and after all it has no implementation character in most companies.
In particular the argument that diversity management has only a symbolic character was raised repeatedly by most of the interviewees. At the same time, looking at organisations we can recognise kind of a boom of diversity management in Germany (Süß and Kleiner 2007). While some see more in diversity management then a fashionable trend and believe that organisations engage seriously with diversity management (Flick 2007), others doubt the serious commitment of organisation regarding diversity management. Apparently, all interviewed stakeholders believe that organisations do not sincerely engage and commit to organisational diversity management approaches and the same does apply to the recent governmental efforts concerned with diversity management.
207 Diversity management gained some more relevance in recent years, particularly due to latest governmental attempts of promoting diversity management aiming to aid the better integration of ethnic minorities in Germany, through initiatives such as the Campaign Diversity as Chance and the Diversity Charta. Particularly the governmental initiative, the Diversity Charta, created some attention to the concept of diversity management, especially on side of a number of companies and institutions, which signed the Charta and hence committed to appreciating and treating people fairly in business organisations. For instance, the company examined for this study is one of the companies that signed the Diversity Charta. As a result of the governmental efforts concerned with diversity management, the previous mostly unknown concept of diversity management, particularly in public but also among HR practitioners, is receiving now wider recognition particularly in HR and scholarly circles. However, most of the interviewed stakeholders take a rather critical standpoint towards the Diversity Charta and doubt that companies seriously commit to diversity management in course of signing the Charta. For instance Ricardo, a associate of a trade union (male and of Spanish ethnicity), argues:
Take the Diversity Charta, they can simply sign in, but the only requirement is to write a yearly report, which is not standardised in any form and there are no common serious indicators or something like that. In principle it looks as every company can just come and say I am now part of the Diversity Charta and this can be then used by the company to create a better image or in order to get other possible benefits.
However, beyond the criticism some stakeholders welcome the governmental efforts of promoting diversity management, particularly the therewith connected gained popularity of diversity management, such as for instance Brigitte, who is an academic and diversity trainer and consultant (female and native-born German)
Certainly diversity management has gained some publicity through the Campaign Diversity as Chance and the Diversity Charta gave a relevant
208 impulse too. Altogether it can be understood as a backing up by the federal government.
Surely, the recent governmental interest and the efforts regarding diversity management have to be appreciated as they do create a form of attention that has been absent beforehand. However, considering these insights it seems rather illusionary to think of diversity management as the right instrument for combating race discrimination in employment. What we can view here is a recent change of discourse, which yet misses on targeting relevant structures and habitusses. For instance, the diversity Charta can be understood as a clear change in discourse, but seemingly not more than that. Nonetheless, changing discourse gives no guarantee for social change. As Fairclough (2003) pointed out, achieving cultural, social and organisational change calls not only for change in discourse but also for interventions at different levels, such as targeting structures and habituses. It appears that the development of the diversity management field can be described only as minor, since diversity management has been firstly introduced in the German context fifteen years ago.
The governmental dominance in the field of diversity management can clearly be understood as the dominance of the majority group, as the German government predominantly consists of native-born Germans. Hence, the majority group has the power to shape not only the diversity field, but also the diversity agenda, based on an unequal balance of power. The dominant group defines the notion of diversity management as well as the content and goals of related governmental policies. Considering the earlier described taboo regarding race related issues is only one explanation for the absence of serious efforts concerned with race equality and equal opportunities. Along with the efforts and interest the government started to provide also financial recourses for diversity management projects as well as research. This development could be viewed as solely positive, but there is also a downside. The government, besides companies, has been named by most of the interviewed stakeholders as the most influential player in the field of diversity management in Germany. In particular the government has the ability
209 to shape the diversity management agenda due to the allocation of financial recourses. One result is that the focus of diversity management has been recently directed towards the integration of ethnic minorities. This development implies two problems, which are discussed in the following.
The first problem refers to the fact that the notion of diversity management when it comes to the management of ethnic diversity does not include issues such as race discrimination or race equality. This is rather unsurprising considering, firstly, that race related issues are largely taboo in the German context and, secondly, the absent anti-discrimination and race equality culture particularly on side of the government. Interview evidence suggests that the management of ethnic diversity is rather build upon the notion of integration, which is the dominant concept regarding the management of ethnic diversity in Germany.
As mentioned in earlier chapters of this thesis, the notion of integration comes along with integracism paired with symbolic violence and also ethnocentric views on the topic of managing ethnic diversity. This can be viewed as a major error if aiming for equal opportunities and race equality and it displays a major difference to diversity management concepts we can find for example in the UK or the US, where the notion of diversity does consider above mentioned issues. These insights clearly highlight not only the call of considering history in management research, in order to for instance understand the above mentioned taboos in handling race related issues in Germany, but also the call to investigate underlying power relations when attempting to understand social phenomena. The latter call of considering power relations brings us to the second problem coming from the governmental dominance in the field of diversity management and to the main focus of this section, namely how the struggle for power and existing power relations shape the field of diversity management in Germany.
The dominance of native-born German women in the field of diversity management can be viewed as one reason for the absence of race related issues and particularly for the absence of an ethnic minority voice in the debate
210 concerned with diversity management. The dominance of native-born female scholars in the diversity management field in Germany derives from the fact that native-born German women were the first to engage which diversity management in Germany. As a result, the gender issue not only dominates the scientific discourse on diversity management (Koall and Bruchhagen, 2002; Hermes and Rohrmann, 2006; Krell 2008), but also do native-born German women dominate the field of diversity management in different areas. For instance John, an academic and board member of two relavant platforms concerned with diversity management and intercultural matters (male and of America ethnicity), argues:
The women are the most powerful, they have a very long and deep movement, they are actually not a minority in the diversity management field but rather the majority and most of the diversity groups came from gender groups.
Drawing on interview evidence, it appears for instance that we can find today a number of women in organisations, which previous to their engagement with diversity management have been promoting women equality in companies. Moreover, feminist scholars who moved from the gender topic to diversity management simply kept focusing on women equality in the scope of diversity management. Ingeborg, the university professor for intercultural studies (female and native-born German), identifies this issue as distinctive for the German context:
Thus in the German diversity management field, ehm there is one speciality, that we so to say can trace back the shift from woman equality to diversity management.
Irene, an academic and diversity management trainer and consultant (female and native-born German), views herself responsible for this shift.
211 Actually I think that my colleague and me are responsible for the shift from woman equality to diversity management in Germany. We introduced the concept in the 1990s.
Without doubt the above quoted scholar is one of the most relevant scholars in the field of diversity management. Looking closer at her work previous to diversity management, she could be called a classical feminist scholar; a feminist scholar who focuses on women equality, but unfortunately only on women equality for native-born German women. This is not a single instance, but rather a pattern of most feminist scholars who moved to diversity management. In view of this and considering that in Germany, woman studies have been created by, and for native- German women (Bednarz-Braun 2004a; Lenz 1996) it is rather unsurprising that race related issues are largely not taken into account in current organisational diversity management agendas as well as in the academic studies of diversity management. It could be argued that the notion of diversity management is shaped particularly by feminist scholars, build upon ethnocentrism and genderism, which neglects racism and other forms of discrimination. This might also explain why organisations view managing ethnic diversity still as pertinent. It also might explain the absence of an ethnic minority voice in the debate concerned with diversity management.
The recent change of discourse on side of the government, which not only suddenly relates the notion of diversity management to the integration of ethnic minorities, I deliberately say integration of ethnic minorities and not race related issues or race equality as such topics and terms an not to be found in the discourse, but highlights the relevance of diversity management for the integration of immigrants, can be understood as a major milestone for the field of diversity management in Germany. In the following I ought to explain two reasons that let me think of this shift as a major milestone. The first reason refers to the fact that the social category ethnicity has been simply neglected in relation to diversity management until recently. Even though I argued above that what we view is only a change of discourse rather than a change of structures and habitusses it is a
212 positive development nonetheless, which if thought further carefully could offer a promising way to combat race discrimination and aid race equality in Germany.
The second and more important reason relates to what Bourdieu calls a competitive struggle of groups who struggle to maintain or improve their status and their position in the stratified social order (Swartz 1997). Such competitive struggles take place in the different fields of a society such as for example the field of diversity management. As described above, the diversity management field in Germany is still in its beginnings, which makes considering matters such as the struggle for power and power relations a vital issue. Especially the fact that resources are yet concise can be viewed as a major force, driving the struggle for power in the field of diversity management in Germany. Hence, it is rather unsurprising that when exploring the multi-stakeholder context of diversity management, it appears to be a field, which is marked by competition rather than collaboration. In particular, the competition over financial resources especially on side of feminist scholars, who dominate the field of diversity management in Germany, is described in the following section.
While there was previously a focus on women equality on side of the government but also on side of companies in terms of diversity management, we can see now that the race related issues receive more attention particularly from the government and the wider public. On the other side, women equality receives less attention and not only less attention but also less financial resources, which must be viewed as the bouncing point. The government started allocating financial recourses to projects and research projects concerned with ethnic minorities and started to withdraw resources for projects related to women equality. This development gave the starting shot for the competition for recourses and the struggle to maintain or improve the status and the position of feminist diversity management scholars in the field of diversity management. The interesting point is that feminist diversity scholars and practitioners now move from their feminist studies and agenda to the studies of the integration of ethnic minorities instead of defending the importance of gender related issues. We have to bear in mind that
213 there was no interest for race related issues beforehand, and women equality was solely thought for native-born women. Irene, an academic and diversity management trainer and consultant (female and native-born German), describes this process as follows:
There are categories, which are fashionable, yes there are categories, which are in and out and here comes exactly the question, of how this processes of a hierarchical order evolves. Because in means on the top, which means do I get money, do I get resources? And if I keep focusing on such a category as gender, for which you do not get so much money any more, ehm that means simply that’s it.
For instance Elke, an academic and diversity management trainer and consultant (female and native-born German), recently started shifting her focus from women equality to race related issues, which is rather surprising as her main focus in diversity management has been women equality for nearly twenty years. In a first attempt she explains this shift as follows
I think it is not longer possible to position yourself in the field with only one category. And I also believe, and other people might disagree with this, but I think the gender topic is over. It is just dead.
However, in a later statement and after a question on my side if this is the real reason for her shift of interest she says
Ok, ok (she laughs saying this) there is no money anymore for women equality (she laughs again). This is maybe the real reasons why I am now interested in the migration topic.
As mentioned earlier this shift of foci is not a single instance in the current field of diversity management. A large number of feminist scholars and also practitioners show similar behaviour. As a result we see now that former feminist
214 diversity scholars and practitioners overtake the field of managing ethnic diversity in Germany in order to secure their status in the field of diversity management.
This development is seen by some interviewed stakeholders rather critical. For instance, Ingeborg, the university professor for intercultural pedagogy, who works on issues such as race discrimination for more than thirty years, argues:
There is no more money for gender and these women do not get any more money as a result. Because of this they are now all jumping on the migrant topic, but they have no clue about the whole topic, they are not experts on such issues. That is simply horrible and in many cities there are now confrontations because they only jump on topics such as forced marriages and ehrenmord, because they have to protect all this poor migrant girls.
This statement shows possible problems that could evolve due to the fact that former feminist diversity scholars do now engage with race related issues, which clearly is not their area of expertise. As mentioned earlier the notion of women equality in Germany does not include race related issues. We can see that ethnocentrism, integracism and symbolic violence play in to the notion of integration, which leads to the fact such scholars and practitioners focus on issues such as forced marriages and honour killing, rather than for instance on race discrimination in employment. It could be argued that Ingeborg simply takes a critical standpoint regarding this development because these women now try to enter her very own field, which leads to a struggle for power for herself. However, in a later statement she specifies her criticism and clarifies her concerns.
Migrant workers are excluded from institutions and organisations working on migrant issues. This is especially bad in universities for example. You have only these native-born German women in these institutions and they do not understand anything of the topic and they have a lot of prejudices against migrants. In particular this organisation Women and Technology in Castrop Brauxel, this is one of my favourite clubs (she says this rather
215 ironically), or the other one Meduse, I had a big fight with them because of their attitude towards migrants. I stopped working with them because of this. Funnily a lot of people are becoming migration experts nowadays. I was a short while ago at a conference in Berlin, Media and migrants, and suddenly everybody is jumping on the migrants because there is some money left, yes, and in particular the ones who were doing women projects before.
Ingeborg points out two relevant issues in the last statement. The first issue refers to the fact that feminist diversity management scholars or practitioners, who are competing for recourses and struggling to maintain or improve their status and their position in the field of diversity management, exclude ethnic minority stakeholders from the field of diversity management. This might be one explanation for the absence of an ethnic minority voice in the field of diversity management in Germany. As a result, the majority group dominates the field, which leads to the fact that the language of diversity management is provided by the dominant group. Hence, earlier described taboos in terms of terminology and topics connected to race related issues are transferred to the language of diversity management. In this regard, it is rather unsurprising that topics such as racism and/or race discrimination at work remain not considered in current diversity management debates and agenda.
The second issue mentioned by Ingeborg, brings us back to the notion of integracism as well as ethnocentrism. Ingeborg argues that these women do not understand race related issues and she moreover argues that these women hold negative attitudes against ethnic minorities. This and the fact that an ethnic minority voice is absent in the field of diversity management gives a rather negative outlook in seeing diversity management as the right instrument to aid race equality or combat race discrimination in the German context.
In order to make diversity management a more promising instrument attempting to aid the inclusion of ethnic minorities in Germany, clearly the existing internal
216 power relations in the diversity management field need to be targeted. The government plays a particular role in this process as it has the power to allocate financial recourses to different stakeholders and institutions in the field. Allocating money predominantly to native-born German women makes change more than difficult as it only secures and preserves previous power relations. This is particular important, considering that a field structures the social settings of organisations in which habitus operates (Bourdieu 1977). Preserving existing power relations leads to the preservation of structures and habitusses. Exactly this structures and habitusses have to be targeted if change in terms of managing ethnic diversity is seriously wanted.
8.3 The organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany
Drawing on case study company data, this section provides an understanding of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in the company under scrutiny. Furthermore, this section provides insights of the relationship between the notion of integration, namely integracism, symbolic violence and diversity management. It materialises that both, symbolic violence as well as integracism can be viewed as deep levelled mechanisms of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in this company. As explained in the conceptual framework, which was proposed earlier, habitus denotes the organisational culture and organisational memory (meso-level) that governs the conduct of action and interaction in an organisation (Mahar et al. 1990). Moreover, habitus shapes individual and collective response to the present and future and mediates the effects of external structures to produce action (Swartz 1997: 69). Hence, the concept of habitus brings into the subjective dimension of human agency into the analysis (Grenfell and James 1998: 15) and functions thereby as a bridge between structure and agency.
The section starts in providing background information of the MNC, including the overall global diversity management strategy of the MNC. After this, the subsidiary located in Germany is described, which includes a examination of the
217 employment structure of the plant as well as a description of the Human Resources department. This is followed by an examination of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity of the German subsidiary, which discusses the possible reasons for the absent habitus of managing ethnic diversity. Moreover, this section gives an account to the employee experience of diversity management in the German subsidiary, which unfortunately only underlines the absent habitus of managing ethnic diversity.
8.3.1 Description of the company
As mentioned in the methodology chapter of this thesis the company asked to remain anonymous. At the beginning of the case study, the for this project responsible company’s contact person made clear that the company should only be revealed in case that the outcomes of the study are positive, which indicates an uncertainty regarding the company’s diversity management approach. However, it seams that the company realised in the course of the study that the study outcomes might not be as expected. In this regard it was decided that the company should be kept anonymous, at the end of the study. Nonetheless this section provides some company information in order to give an idea about the background of the company and its current state. Acknowledging the company’s wish to remain anonymous it is not possible to disclose exact information, which would make it possible identifying the company. Therefore, the description of the company and its history is presented in a rather vague manner, securing anonymity but also giving enough company information allowing an understanding of the company.
The first part of this section gives a brief introduction of the multinational company, including its history and current state. The second part of this section focuses particularly on the German plants of the company.
8.3.1.1 History of the company
The company was founded in North America manufacturing telecommunications equipment more then hundred years ago. In its beginnings it was only a small mechanical department, which manufactured telephones and telephone equipment
218 for a North American country. The small manufacturing department expanded due to the growing telephone sector rapidly. As a result of this telecommunication boom, the once small department was transformed to a company with hundreds of employees by the end of 1800, not only manufacturing telecommunications equipment but also supplying it throughout the country. As the manufacturing branch expanded, its production capacity increased past the demand for telecommunication equipment and the company started manufacturing further products. The company expanded further until the great depression of the 1930s. At this time the company had a headcount of 6100 and sales figures of $34 million a year. In course of the great depression sales and headcount dropped dramatically but only to recover soon after.
Along with the development of digital technologies, the optical boom and the introduction of the Internet the company grew further, offering its services globally for instance in Europe, China and the USA by the mid 1980s. At its peak, the company was employing nearly 100,000 employees worldwide. However, after the Internet bubble fell apart in the early 2000s, the company posted significant losses, the companies stock crashed and as a result the company had to downsize its work force by nearly two-thirds, which made of 60,000 employees, thereby, giving the continuous success story of this company a harsh end.
Since then the company was not able to get back to its former size and employee numbers are still dropping gradually. The current global economic crisis only worsens the company’s state. Despite of this unfortunate situation the communication-service company still conducts operations in more than 150 markets and employs 32.000 employees all over the world, serving most of the Fortune 500 companies.
8.3.1.2 The matrix structure
The MNC has changed its organisational structure several times in the past. Shortly after the crash in the early 2000s the organisational structure transformed ones again, to a so-called matrix structure. Matrix management is defined as
219 laying one or more new forms of departmentalisation on top of an existing form. Often organisations adopt new structures because of for instance normative pressure (Burns and Wholey 1993). In the case of this company the pressure might have come from the shareholders, which requested change in the organisational structure after the crash of the market and the therewith-connected loss in shares. In 2008, at the time when the case study was carried out the organisational structure still followed the principle a matrix structure. According to Galbraith (1972, 1973), a simple matrix structure provides coordination across functional departments though the development of liaison roles, which is comparable to the role of a project manager. A more complex matrix is developed by sequentially adding a matrix director, a matrix department, and a horizontal hierarchy with authority rivalling the vertical-functional hierarchy existing in an organisation. The matrix structure groups employees by both function and product. In the case of the studied company the matrix structure additionally incorporates a regional dimension. The regional dimension is classified in five regional groups, as shown in the graph below.
Table 8: The Matrix structure of the case study company by regional dimensions
Global
ASIAPAC NA EMEA CALIA
The global matrix group stands above all other regional groups, which are ASIAPAC standing for the Asian Pacific region, NA standing for Nord-America, EMEA standing for the European and Middle Eastern region and finally CALIA standing for the Caribbean and Latin American region. As this company is a multi- national company which operates in more then 150 countries, matrix
220 departments and matrix directors are scattered all over these 150 countries. This means that for instance a German manager aligned to a matrix department located in for instance India, has to report back to a probably Indian matrix director located in India. However, according to an independent review of the company, which was submitted to the audit committee of the boards of directors, the current matrix structure appears to be a rather problematic organisational structure. The matrix structure is criticized of creating a matrix organisation, which for instance lacks of clear assignment of responsibilities and lacks sufficient monitoring ensuring that responsibilities and activities are met. The review ends with a call for the re-examination of the matrix organisation. At the time the case study took place the matrix structure described above was still in place. The impact for the German plant is described in the section concerned with the German plant.
8.3.1.3 The global diversity management approach of the MNC
This section illustrates the global diversity management policy of the MNC under study. Examining the global diversity management policy of the MNC is particularly relevant since a later section in this thesis discusses the extent to which the global diversity management policy of the MNC influences the local diversity policy of the German plants. The company’s diversity agenda runs under the heading “Global diversity and Inclusion.” In a handbook available at the Global Diversity and Inclusion HR Education Station, which is to be found on the intranet of the company, the company presents its commitment to and its definition of diversity management. According to this handbook, the company is “committed to creating a diverse workforce and fostering an innovative environment that values and leverages differences; enabling every individual to contribute to their full and unique potential”. Moreover, the company’s definition of diversity says
diversity isn’t just about gender, age, ethnicity, orientation, ability or cultural background. It’s a way of thinking differently and about making sure we are getting the best ideas, effort and performance from all of our people. When we talk about diversity at (…), we’re talking about building
221 an inclusive environment that allows us to leverage the contributions of all our people as we strengthen our competitiveness in the global marketplace.
The handbook also gives information about why diversity management is viewed as important for this company. The main drivers named by the company are the business case of diversity management, globalization, and future talent shortages. One could argue that all three drivers can be summarised under the business case of diversity management. Clearly business related motivations and reasons are the main drivers for diversity management in this company. This is rather unsurprising as the debates and policies on diversity management often highlight the business case of diversity management rather than topics such as racism, discrimination or equal opportunities (Agocs and Burr 1996). On the intranet as well as in a number of documents of the case study company it is stated that diversity needs to be integrated into every aspect of the business and to align diversity initiatives to support the needs of the business. The following company’s Corporate Leadership Council Model outlines how this should be done.
Table 9: The diversity management strategy of the case study company
Diversity Strategy Drives Business Outcomes
aders
Success of Diversity
Recruit Divers Employees Retain Diverse Employees Develop Diverse Le Ensure Compliance with Diversity laws Market/Sell to Diverse Costumers Measure Initiatives Promote Supplier Diversity
Integrate Diversity into every aspect of the Business and align diversity initiatives to support the needs of the business
222 Exploring this graph the absence of issues such as racism, discrimination or equal opportunities strikes. In general, terms such as racism or discrimination are not to be found in any of the company’s policies and documents concerned with diversity management. As mentioned in an earlier section of this thesis, titled the evolution of diversity management, Kirton and Green (2006) argue that the language of diversity management has replaced the language of equal opportunities in many British organisations. The same seems to apply for the company studied for this project, despite the fact that this company is a North- American company and not a British one.
However, while there is no emphasis on racism and discrimination or equal opportunities there is emphasis on inclusion, which is already reflected in the name of diversity agenda called “Global diversity and Inclusion.” However, what the term inclusion stands for and who should be included is described rather blurred. One statement retrieved from the intranet gives us a vague idea what inclusion refers to.
At (…), diversity isn’t just about gender, age, ethnicity or cultural background. It’s a way of thinking differently and making sure we are getting the best ideas, effort and performance from all of our people When we talk about diversity at (…), we are talking about building an inclusive environment that allows us to leverage the contributions of all our people as we strengthen our competitiveness in the global marketplace.
Reading this statement it becomes clear that the term inclusion is not connected to the notion of equal opportunities. In this company inclusion is rather thought in the notion of improving the efficiency and competitive ability of organisations. This brings us back to the business case of diversity management, which thinks of inclusion only in terms of making use of the potential and abilities of its diverse workgroups in order to benefit an organisation (Cox and Blake 1991; Watson et al. 1993; Bhadury et al. 2000).
223 However, according to company documents and information available in the company’s intranet, efforts concerned with inclusion go beyond the emphasis of inclusion in the title of the diversity management policy. One measure is the formation of so-called Global diversity Business Councils, were employees are encouraged to actively participate. There are six different so-called Global diversity Business Councils: the Asian Business Council, the Black Business Council, the Disabilities Business Council, the GLBT Business Council (gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Business Council), the Latino Business Council and lastly the Women’s Business Council. All six councils have four common focus areas, which are linked to the business objectives of the company. These four pillars are: recruitment, retention, professional development and community. The following graph displays these four focus areas and moreover the by the different areas targeted objectives.
Table 10: Focus areas of the diversity business councils from the case study company
Support recruitment Results in more diverse candidate slates
Drive employee engagement and Increased productivity and job satisfaction retention
Enhance professional Create more knowledgeable emplyees with stronger leadership skills development
Strengthen ties to communities and Build networking oppertunities while giving back to our communities customers
The objectives illustrated above are only a few of the company’s objectives in regard of diversity management. Further objectives can be summarised in six points. The first Diversity and Inclusion Objective, as called by the company, refers to the commitment of the CEO to review diversity metrics quarterly, which means that improvement in business specific identified areas should be measured. The second objective is diversity reviews, which display a commitment to review say/do actions. The third objective is to influence recruitment strategies in providing recommendations to drive strategies to create a diverse workforce. The forth objective is concerned with the leadership development across differences.
224 Creating new program opportunities and tracking diversity in international leadership development programs are the measures in course of this objective. Brand awareness or building the brand is the fifth objective in regard of diversity management. The aim is to build the brand not only internally via leader and employee communication and special programs, but also externally via targeted award submissions, conference participation, advertising, speaking, etc. The last objective is called advance inclusion training, targeting new employees but also established managers in order to engage employees and develop leaders. The aim is to drive an understanding of broader global business impact and cultural competencies.
A further measure targeting the inclusion of disadvantaged groups is the partnership with a NGO
… that develops and places talented minority university students in participating companies, and prepares them for corporate and community leadership, which maintains a presence in the US, Canada, Mexico and South Africa.
European countries or for instance Germany are not among these above named countries. Further measures are the yearly celebration of the International Woman’s Day and developing a diverse supplier base.
The extent to which the above described objectives are translated into practice and if these objectives lead into effective measures regarding the inclusion of disadvantaged groups is beyond my knowledge as my study took place in one of the German plants. To what extent organisational diversity management policies and programmes can in fact deal with inequality and discrimination in the workplace depends particularly on the organisational efforts of management intervention attempting to create change in terms of workforce diversity (Thomas and Ely 1996). The company did receive a number of awards and recognition for its diversity management initiatives, but so did the German plant were this case
225 study took place. As I will show later it is rather surprising that the German plant received an award, as their efforts in regard of diversity management must be described as very limited. Lastly, the diversity management approach sets a particular focus on HR practitioners of the company. The following statement shows the relevance given to HR practitioners in regard to diversity management.
It is incumbent upon HR practitioners to understand the global trends that are reshaping business, recognize the priority of managing ethnic diversity and inclusion issues in an increasingly global business environment, and to manage those issues strategically for the benefit of the organisation and it’s people.
Despite of this, the MNC has only five diversity managers in total, covering positions such as Leader Diversity Acting, HR specialist Diversity and Inclusion, Compliance and Diversity Manager, Supplier Diversity and Diversity Prime. These employees are all located in the North America; none is to find in Germany for instance.
8.3.1.4 The German plants
This section described the German plants, particularly the one where the study took place. In order to draw a sufficient picture of the German plant it is necessary to raise a few aspects relevant to the study. Therefore, the section starts with displaying the workforce structure of the German plants, examining also issues such as the distribution of managerial positions by sex, as well as by nationality and were possible by ethnicity. Next we look at the human resource department of the studied German plant and the fact that the German human resource department is the only department world wide, which is not integrated in the overall matrix structure of the company. The last part discusses briefly the challenges faced by the human resource department due to the global economic downturn and the earlier economic struggles of the MNC.
226 8.3.1.5 Workforce structure of the German plants
The MNC has with five plants a substantial presence in the German telecommunication service market, employing 481 employees at the time of the study. Talking about managing ethnic diversity requires to firstly getting an idea about the workforce diversity of this company. As ethnic monitoring is not a common practice for organisations in Germany, it is only possible to count employees holding a nationality other than German, instead of counting ethnic minority individuals in general. This must be viewed as problematic, as a number of ethnic minority individuals naturalised in recent years. Considering this I tried to identify ethnic minority workers holding a German passport, by their surnames. Thirteen employees of German nationality have none-German sounding surnames, two of them sounding Greek, four of them Italian, two might be of former Yugoslavian decent, one Turkish, one Romanian, one English, one Russian and the last one from the Ivory Coast (according to one member of the HR department), which besides is the only black person in this company. However, it is rather difficult to clearly allocate these people to a particular ethnic group based on their surnames. Therefore these workers are not included in the following analysis. Nonetheless it is of importance to mention that none of these workers are holding managerial positions in this company.
Out of 481 employees, only 50 hold a nationality other than German. However, investigating the below table, it strikes that most of the employed non-German nationals do not belong to groups defined as ethnic minorities in Germany. For instance, only eight out of fifty of the non-German nationals are from countries, which had guest worker agreements with Germany in the past. These employees are one Croatian, one Turkish, one Tunisian, one Italian, one Greek, one Spaniard and two Serbian. Clearly, it could be argued that the workforce of this company does not mirror Germany’s population, particularly Germany’s ethnic minority groups.
Table 11: Employees of non-German nationality from the Case study company Nationality Sex Position in the company Department Afghani Male None-managerial position Technology American Male Low level managerial position Technology American Male Middle level managerial position Marketing American Male High level managerial position Sales American Female Low level managerial position Technology American Female Middle level managerial position Finance American Female None-managerial position Technology Austrian Male Middle level managerial position Technology Austrian Male Low level managerial position Technology Austrian Male High level managerial position Sales Brazilian Female None-managerial position Technology British Male None-managerial position Finance British Male Low level managerial position Research & Development British Female None-managerial position Sales British Female Low level managerial position Technology British Female Low level managerial position Sales British Female Low level managerial position Human Resources Canadian Male None-managerial position Technology Canadian Male Low level managerial position Sales Canadian Male Low level managerial position Technology Canadian Female None-managerial position Technology Croatian Male None-managerial position Technology Danish Female None-managerial position Finance French Male None-managerial position Technology French Male None-managerial position Technology French Male Low level managerial position Technology French Male Low level managerial position Sales French Female Middle level managerial position Sales French Female Low level managerial position Finance Greek Male None-managerial position Technology Indian Male None-managerial position Technology Iranian Female None-managerial position Technology Iranian Male None-managerial position Technology Irish Male High level managerial position Technology Italian Male None-managerial position Technology Rumanian Male None-managerial position Technology Rumanian Male Low level managerial position Technology Rumanian Male Low level managerial position Technology Rumanian Male None-managerial position Technology Rumanian Male None-managerial position Technology Rumanian Male None-managerial position Technology Rumanian Male None-managerial position Technology Rumanian Female None-managerial position Technology Serbian Male None-managerial position Technology Serbian Male None-managerial position Research & Development Spanish Male None-managerial position Finance Swedish Male Low level managerial position Technology Swiss Female None-managerial position Technology Tunisian Male None-managerial position Sales Turkish Male None-managerial position Sales
228 This becomes more obvious by scrutinizing the nationalities of the other 42 Non- German nationals working in this company. For instance, the with 17 employees biggest group, consists of people of Anglo-Saxon nationalities, such as six Americans, six British, one Irish and four Canadian employees. This is rather unsurprising as the company has its headquarter in North America. The other Non-German national employees are six French, eight Romanians, one Swedish, one Swiss, one Brazilian, one Afghani, one Indian, two Iranians, and three Austrians. The Indian and the eight Rumanian were employed based on the green- card scheme, introduced by the government in order to attract IT specialist to Germany. However, as we can see most of the Non-German national employees must be viewed as expatriates, who are joining the company and living in Germany only for a designated time, rather than members of German ethnic minorities, who do live and work in Germany on a permanent basis.
Examining the table, a further interesting point strikes. The table also shows in addition to the sex and nationality and the department affiliation of the employees, their position in the organisation. The displayed positions are divided in none- managerial, low-level managerial, middle-level managerial, and high-level managerial. Strikingly, none of the non-German national employees, belonging to an ethnic minority in Germany, holds a managerial position in the company. Three white males hold the only three high-level managerial positions not held by German nationals (one Irish, one Austrian and one American national). This confirms a statement made by Michel, one of the interviewed stakeholders: “People with migration background are only very rarely to be found in the middle or higher levels of employment, except of maybe a Swiss chairman.”
In the next step, we focus on the Gender division in the workforce structure of this company. The number of female employees in this company is with 81 female employees and therefore less than twenty per cent of the workforce, noticeably low. This has been explained, by a member of the HR department, with the argument that seventy to eighty per cent of the jobs are of technical nature in this company. Moreover, most of the female employees in this company work in
229 departments such as human resources, finance, and marketing, and assistance. Contrary, only a few female employees work in the technology or sales department. However, the more outstanding issue is that most of the female employees hold none-managerial positions in the company. The table below shows this clearly.
Table 12: Job positions by sex from the case study company Sex None-managerial Low-level Middle-level High-level position managerial managerial managerial position position position Male 147 123 113 7 Female 54 25 11 1 Total 201 148 124 8
By exploring this table, it becomes obvious that there is a clear gender division in this company. Only a few women are to be found in the managerial level of this company. Strikingly, women hold only eleven out of hundred thirteen middle- level managerial positions and only one out of eight high-level managerial positions. The only high-level managerial position held by a woman is located in a department called assistance.
A further remark must be done regarding the age structure of the workforce. The workforce lacks of young people and consists for the most part of middle-aged workers, due to the stop in recruitment caused by the economic downturn. This is displayed visibly by some photographs, which were taken in this company during the study. The photographs were taken in one of the open-plan offices and when looking at the pictures the only employers to see are white, male and middle-aged. This only displays the lack of diversity in this company and the over presence of white-male-middle-aged employees. Unfortunately permission has not been granted to use this photographs for this thesis.
8.3.1.5 The human resources department of the German plant
As mentioned previously, the German subsidiary is integrated in the matrix structure of the multi-national company. This means that staff located in Germany
230 does not necessarily manage or report to departments located in Germany. This applies to all departments in Germany, except one, the human recourses department. While human recourses are managed in the UK for all subsidiaries world wide, the German subsidiary is the only one holding power over its own human resources department. This means that the recruitment for all other subsidiaries, or also redundancies, is done in the UK, except for the case of the subsidiary in Germany. This exception is officially made because of the German labour law, particularly the Industrial Constitution Law, which determines that all decisions taken concerned with human recourses need to be approved by the company’s works council. Additionally, German data protection laws make the usage of SAP modules for human resources management impossible. The result is as mentioned above, a from the MNC independent human resources management department in the German subsidiary.
This is the official justification of this exception. However, during talks and interviews with members of the human recourse department it has been raised several times that it would be utterly impossible to accept that others are taking for instance recruitment decisions for the German subsidiary. For instance Birgit said: “How should somebody in the UK know if the applicant will fit in our company? We want to decide such stuff on our own and this is what we are doing.” Of course there are legal reasons preventing the usage of SAP modules for human resources management in Germany. However, it appears that there is also a strong resistance to let go of power regarding the management of human resources on side of the German subsidiaries. The following chart displays the different functions of the human resources department at the German plant.
231 Table 13: Structure of the HR department in the case study company
HR Business Partner Central Region
Employee Employee Works council Compensation relations & HR HR Advisor services relations
The first dimension is the HR Business Partner Central Region. Central Region refers to the EMEA region. This means that the human resources department is obliged to report to the manager of the Central Region. The next dimension shows the five divisions covered by the human resource department, of which two are particularly important. The first important division is the work council, which, as mentioned above, needs to be incorporated when taking HR decisions. The other important division is compensation, which became very significant in recent years due to the high number of employee dismissals. For instance, the workforce of the German subsidiary shrank dramatically, from 1600 employees in 2001 to only 481 in 2008. As a matter of fact the HR department function lies in recent years predominantly in making employees redundant. For instance, only eight new employees were recruited in 2008. However, the current economic crisis means that further workforce reductions are unavoidable. The fact that the German subsidiary is downsizing since the early 2000s overshadows all other human resource department divisions. Divisions such as HR Advisor are nearly redundant at the current stage, as one of their functions is for instance the handling of recruiting employees through green-card schemes.
Moreover, by examining the above chart, it becomes obvious that one division is missing totally. There is no division explicitly responsible for diversity management, equal opportunities or anti-discrimination. Strikingly, the company is violating legal obligations in not providing a contact point for employees in
232 case of discrimination. This means that employees do not know where to go or who to approach in case they were discriminated against.
Lastly, a further interesting aspect regarding the human resources department of the German subsidiary is the fact that all members of the human resource department are native-born Germans. How this shapes the diversity management agenda of the German subsidiary is discussed in one of the following sections of this chapter.
8.3.2 The organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity
This section provides an understanding of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in the German subsidiary of the MNC described earlier. Additionally, this section provides insights of the relationship between the notion of integration, namely integracism and diversity management. It is also shown that symbolic violence analysed and described in an earlier chapter of this thesis, influences employment practices as well as the management of ethnic diversity in this company. It materialises that both symbolic violence as well as integracism can be viewed as deep levelled mechanisms of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in this company. In view of this, this section is providing insights of the interwoven and interrelated nature of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany.
The theoretical concept of habitus represents the organisational culture and organisational memory that governs the conduct of action and interaction in the organisation (Mahar et al. 1990). However, drawing on interview and documentary evidence from the company case study, it materialised during the study that an organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity is simply absent in the examined German subsidiary and in addition to that managing ethnic diversity is not viewed as pertinent. The fact that there is no noteworthy habitus of managing ethnic diversity in this company and that the management of ethnic diversity is not seen as pertinent complies with findings from a study carried out
233 by Köppel et al. in 2007. According to the study titled “International Status Quo of Cultural Diversity Management” (cultural diversity management refers to the management of ethnic diversity in this study), cultural diversity management in Germany is lagging behind in an international comparison across all statements collected in this survey. For instance, more than half of the German companies do not practise “cultural diversity management” at present and
… a comparison between the results of each country shows that companies in all other countries rate culture higher than German companies. This shows that the issue of cultural diversity does not receive the same attention in Germany as in other countries, even though a share of 8.8 percent foreign nationals in the total population and the current discussion about migration and equal opportunity legislation would lead to a different conclusion. (Köppel et al.: 7)
In an attempt to explain this phenomena the authors state the following
It is self-evident that this is caused by the fact that German workforces seem not to be as internationally structured as those in other countries. “Seem” is the operative word in this context, as this assessment is probably due to an error of judgment on the part of the companies, since Germany is the European country with the highest proportion of foreign nationals in its population, after Austria and Luxembourg (Köppel et al.: 18).
It could be argued that this judgement is wrong, instead of only seemingly, considering the fact that nearly twenty per cent of the population belong to an ethnic minority in Germany. Clearly this explanation seems rather unsatisfactory. Such explanation rather indicates that Germany is still in a state of denial regarding its ethnic minority population. Taking these insights into account and the finding that there is no organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in the examined company, this section is set out to explain the possible reasons for
234 the absence of a habitus related to the management of ethnic diversity in the German subsidiary under scrutiny. Four different reasons could be made responsible for the absent organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity. These reasons are firstly the failed global diversity management policy of the MNC headquarters, secondly the tyranny of history which influences individual and organisational action in terms of diversity management, the influence of integracism and lastly the internalisation of symbolic violence against ethnic minority workers.
As mentioned previously, the MNC under scrutiny does have a global diversity management policy. However, the diversity management approach of the German plant differs dramatically from the diversity management approach of the MNC’s headquarters described in an earlier section of this chapter. Investigating the German branch, interview and documentary evidence suggests that the global diversity management policy and related measures are only existent through its presence on the intranet and through a few national activities engaged with gender, respectively woman equality. Interestingly, ethnic diversity, which is the most highlighted aspect of diversity management in the MNC headquarters, is not considered at all in the German branch. This immense disparity in terms of diversity management strategy between the MNC headquarters and the German branch could be seen as an indicator for the existence of a localised diversity management strategy on side of the MNC. As mentioned in an earlier chapter of this thesis, the localised approach allows local branches to identify and set out own priorities in terms of diversity management (Özbilgin 2008). However, according to Christoph, the head of the human recourses team (male and native- born German), it is the universal diversity management strategy, which the MNC headquarters are applying. Christoph explains the MNC’s choice as follows
The company wishes and has been practicing this in the past that we have one direction of impact in terms of diversity management. It should not make any difference in which country one lives and in which country the branch is. The idea is that we live the same culture wherever we are. The
235 company wants to have a global and consistent diversity management policy and frame.
Contrary to the localised strategy, a universal diversity management strategy does not consider regional and national variations in diversity management and policies and practices of diversity management are (or lets better say should be) standardised throughout the global firm. However, scrutinising the German branch, the global standardisation of diversity management policies and practices seems not to go beyond the diversity management content available on the intranet and a so-called ethics hotline (located in North-America). Strikingly there is nobody responsible for the implementation and the accomplishment of diversity management practices and measures in Germany. Interview and documentary evidence suggests that in general the MNC headquarters only offer very basic guidance in regard of diversity management and do not enforce any diversity management practices or measures.
However, this appears to be a widespread practice among global MNCs. For instance, Egan and Bendick (2003) revealed in their research that the majority of the US MNCs they investigated deployed a multi-domestic approach towards diversity management, with the corporate headquarters only offering rudimentary advice for diversity management to foreign subsidiaries, also driven by the attempt to avoid the perceived complexity implicated in the development and enforcement of global diversity management initiatives. As a consequence, the diversity management activities differed significantly amongst foreign subsidiaries. The company investigated for this study reflects this phenomenon evidently. The North-American MNCs headquarters deploy a global diversity management approach, with a major focus on the management of ethnic diversity. However, as mentioned previously, the management of ethnic diversity is not a part of the diversity management agenda of the German subsidiary and so are race related issues in general.
236 Though, it is not only the lack of guidance, which can be made responsible for the poor diversity management practice of the German branch. A further problem is that the North-American MNCs headquarters deploy a universal global diversity management strategy in a local contexts different from their own one, despite the fact that their diversity management approach has been tailored for their own needs and social and legal requirements. Jones et al. (2000) and Ferner et al. (2005) both agree that diversity management approaches deriving from the US are often perceived as unsuitable when applied to other national contexts, leading to high levels of organisational resistance in terms of cultural and institutional aspects. In the same vein, Nishii and Özbilgin (2008: 1883) argue
it is not uncommon for diversity programmes of multinational corporations (MNCs) to be run based on the ethnocentric assumption that domestic definitions and targets are appropriate abroad.
Implementing global diversity management activities in foreign subsidiaries by means of an ethnocentric, host-country perspective comes along with a number of shortcomings and weaknesses (Ferner et al. 2005). Such shortcomings and weaknesses are also to be found in the MNC under scrutiny. For instance, the formation of the so-called Global diversity Business Councils, where employees are encouraged to actively participate. This example shows clearly the ethnocentric and host-country perspective in regard to the global diversity management strategy. For instance, two of the six different Global diversity Business Councils, namely the Asian Business Council and the Black Business Council, seem to be mostly relevant to the North- American headquarters, as numbers of Asian and black ethnic minority workers are large in this local context. However, this does not apply to the German context, where numbers of Asian and Black ethnic minorities are generally much lower than in North America, particularly compared to the number of ethnic minority Turks in Germany. For instance, the German branch only employs one black and not a single Asian worker. The example illustrated above, demonstrates clearly possible
237 shortcomings and weaknesses if deploying global diversity management activities in foreign subsidiaries by means of an ethnocentric, host-country perspective.
The second example, the ethics-hotline, which is thought to give advice in case somebody sees his or her “ethical rights” violated, for example in case somebody is discriminated against, is absolutely useless for the German context. Ulrike, a member of the human resources department (female and native-born German), argues:
The ethics-hotline does not make sense at all, particularly for a European organisation. Who would call from Germany an ethics-hotline located in North America? I think that does not make a lot of sense considering our culture and mentality.
According to Ulrike, nobody uses this hotline. Unfortunately this hotline must be described as the only contact point for discrimination cases in the examined MNC, including the German branches. German organisations are obliged to provide a contact point in cases of discrimination in order to comply with European and German anti-discrimination law. Astonishingly, this is not the case in the German branch under scrutiny. Silvia, also a member of the human resources department (female and native-born German), explains this instance as follows:
No, we do not have any responsible contact person for discrimination cases. We once had a seminar or training about the Equal Treatment Law, but it was more about the legal aspects of it and how we as a company have to protect ourselves. But we did not really talk about the whole topic and also the training was only for the HR team and not for the whole workforce as required by law. But you know it is the same with the contact person for discrimination cases, nobody is really monitoring or controlling it. This will only happen if somebody would take legal action against us and this did not happen so far.
238 This statement shows clearly that the global diversity management strategy fails to capture the local context and the local requirements in terms of for instance legal obligations. Kirton and Greene (2005) point out that the US context of diversity management is very specific to legislative, political and demographic conditions, and that diversity management as a business process is not necessarily transferable to EU nations. However, this instance must be described as a major error and this for different reasons. First of all, employees are let al.one and powerless in case they are discriminated against. Secondly, not providing employees with a contact point where they could get advice and support in case they are discriminated against is a clear violation of European and German anti- discrimination legislation. Hence, the behaviour of the German branch puts the MNC under financial and legal risk, in case an employee decides for example to take legal actions against this practice. The above statement shows what can happen if the MNC does not control the diversity management practices of its subsidiaries abroad.
Furthermore, and partially a result of the lack of control regarding diversity management practices and activities on side of the MNC headquarters is that the German subsidiary identified and set out own priorities in terms of diversity management. As mentioned previously, the management of ethnic diversity is not considered at all and race related issues are absent in the diversity management approach of the German branch. The few activities carried out under the umbrella of diversity management are concerned with woman equality. The fact that the Human resources department consists only of native-born Germans, and predominately of women, might explain this instance.
Moreover, questioning race related issues during the interviews in this company was almost impossible, as I was facing resistance on part of the participants. The topic was defended in different ways; for example, it was simply made ridiculous and also elements of aggression were observed. A further way of avoiding talking about race related issues was to bring the conversation back to woman equality or
239 expatriates instead of ethnic minorities, which was putting the participants at ease. Christoph explains this defensive behaviour as follows “I think this has something to do with our past, you understand what I mean, our political past.” The behaviour described above is very similar to behaviour observed during the stakeholder interviews and brings us back to the tyranny of history examined and discussed earlier in this thesis. It becomes obvious that external structures shape the individual as well as the collective response to the handling of race related issues. Moreover, it becomes visible how the effects of external structures and the macro context intervene with the production of action. Avoiding race related issues in order to avoid possible negative feelings associated with a collective guilt coming from the German Nazi-past seems to have a major effect on the production of actions concerned with the organisational management of ethnic diversity. Frederike, a member of the Human Resources department, explains the whole issue as follows
You do not hear anything about migration background in relation to the workplace, but I think this is because of our subconsciousness, there is a lot going on in Germany I think. Honestly, Germany has war guilt, Germany had a huge issue with foreigners and racism and I think in Germany you do not talk about foreigners because you immediately have the word racism in your mouth. In the Moment you say in Germany something against a foreigner, you are directly called a racist.
In this context, it is rather unsurprising that race related issues are not considered in the diversity management approach of the German branch. If race related issues are generally avoided, for instance in the public and also political debate, how could they possible be part of the organisational diversity management agenda in this company? This applies for instance to race equality or anti-discrimination in terms of race, both issues which remain untouched and are silenced by the public and politics so far. Considering a macro context, such as in Germany a country without an anti-discrimination culture, it is rather unsurprising that the examined organisation does not pay any attention to issues mentioned above. However, this
240 is not the only external macro context effect, which influences and shapes individual and organisational action in terms of managing ethnic diversity. Two more issues can be raised, bringing us back to the notion of integracism and the power of symbolic violence.
As mentioned in previous chapters, Germany does not have a culture of anti- discrimination and race equality. The concept of integration is the dominant concept in the management of ethnic diversity. As a result the issue of equal opportunities at work remains uncontested and ignored. Ethnic minority workers are viewed as in deficit and therefore in need for special support in order to be integrated by the majority group, instead of for example utilising concepts such as diversity management or measures regarding equal opportunities at work. During the focus group held with the Human Resources unit of the company it became apparent how influential the mainstream debate concerned with race related issues is. All focus group participants internalised the dominant perspective on ethnic minorities, seeing them in deficit and therefore not only as unemployable but also not in need for equal opportunities or anti-discrimination measures. The following extract from the focus group reflects this issues clearly
Nicole: We call it integrating or integration politics; call it word cosmetics if you want, but I think Germany engages with the issue of discrimination. The whole discussion about education, the question if children have to be able to talk German before starting school, what do we have to do so that they able to speak German. In Germany the whole debate talks about that the kindergartens are responsible to teach this children German, where I think come on, where do the parents come into the picture here. Why do not the parents have to make sure that their children speak German in the age of six? I think this is a very interesting question. Tom: Because they cannot speak German either. Nicole: Ok, but then it is the liability of the parents to send their children in a kindergarten not ours.
241 Tom: But we also have the debate about how many non-German speaking children a class can stand. Nicole: Yes, exactly. Tom: At the end you will only hear these languages from these countries. Nicole: Yes, yes exactly. Tom: Not that one wants to deprive one of its culture, but if you want to live here, successfully live here, then you have to be able to speak German and here I think and this is my personal opinion, this starts with the upbringing were we have to put some pressure. Only in this way one can help and support future generations, so that they can be successful and equal in the future.
This extract from the focus group shows clearly the internalisation of the notion of integration on side of the participants, which undermines the need to manage ethnic diversity in this organisation. Typically individuals consent to the dominant values and the behavioural schema currently utilised in the field (Kim 2004). Interview evidence suggests that members of ethnic minorities are not seen as equal yet, which undermines the need for the management of ethnic diversity or equal opportunities at work. Moreover, most interview participants share the belief that ethnic minority workers do not have the skills required to work for the examined organisation. This might explain why this company does not employ too many ethnic minority workers, but instead a significant number of expatriates from countries such as Canada, the UK or France. The prejudices are mostly directed towards ethnic minority Turks, who mostly referred to when talking about ethnic minority workers.
Chapter six of this thesis, titled Symbolic violence, provided an account of how symbolic violence manifests against people of Turkish ethnicity in Germany. According to the mainstream and also political debate highly skilled ethnic minority workers are simply non-existent, particularly highly skilled ethnic minority Turks. Due to this practice highly skilled ethnic minority workers experience symbolic exclusion in Germany. Drawing on interview evidence from
242 the company case study it appears that such kind of symbolic exclusion is manifested in the organisational and individual habitus related to the management of ethnic minority workers in the examined company. Employing only a very low number of ethnic minority workers has been defended in different ways. It has been argued that there are simply no ethnic minority Turks holding the necessary skills needed in the labour market in Germany. Moreover, a sales manager stated, „I cannot employ a woman with a headscarf. What would the costumers think if I send them such a woman? They would not accept this. “ It is difficult to argue against the argument that ethnic minority workers lack the necessary skills for employment, as there is a lack of ethnic monitoring in Germany and, therefore, a lack of information regarding the skills and degrees of ethnic minority workers. Though, the second statement speaks volumes and could be argued against in many ways. However, what these statements clearly show is the internalisation of symbolic violence against ethnic minority Turks, as well as the stereotypes held by the native-born German employees of this company.
In Chapter six, symbolic violence was defined as a partly unconscious instrument of domination and an imposing system of symbolism and meaning upon subordinated groups or classes in order to secure the social reproduction of relations of domination (Jenkins 1992; Bourdieu 1994). Symbolic power is according to Bourdieu (1984), also utilised to conserve current classifications in matters such as gender, nation, religion, age and social status. However, in the case described above, symbolic violence is utilised to conserve current classifications in terms of ethnicity. Symbolic violence takes place in such a way that exclusion and inclusion are naturalised and experienced as legitimate. Lastly and most strikingly, this study shows that the internalised violence manifests within the self-consciousness of individuals as well as in a shared organisational habitus, which undermines the overdue call for race equality and the management of ethnic diversity.
243 8.3.3 Employee experience of diversity management
It is difficult to talk about employee experience of diversity management if such experience is simply absent. This could be understood as a reflection and outcome of the absent organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity and generally diversity management in the German plants. All interviews with employees, managers and with members of the HR team show ill results regarding the knowledge of, or the experience with diversity management. One common issue between all these interviewed employees, managers or not, is that none of them had an idea what diversity management stands for at all, besides one person. The one person, who knew about diversity management and was able to provide a definition of diversity management, received diversity management training in his previous company. However, he could not describe any experience with diversity management in the case study company and neither could any other of the interviewed employees. Even the members of the HR team are unfamiliar with the diversity management concept. None of them is accustomed to it on a professional level or a specialist in the area of diversity management. Their diversity management knowledge is based on some random information, rather than on for instance scholarly or practitioner work.
Moreover, none of the employees received any kind of diversity management training. The only source of information in regard to diversity management is the intranet. According to the interviewees, the intranet is overloaded with various information and due to a lack of time it is not possible to obtain all information provided on the intranet. One could argue that if you don’t know about diversity management, why should you search for it on the intranet? A rather shocking issue is the absence of knowledge in the case of discrimination. None of the employees had knowledge about their rights in case he or she is discriminated against. They also do not know whom they can contact in such a case. This is shocking since the company is legally obliged to provide this information. However, the fact is that there is no contact person or unit for such cases might explain the absence of such information. This too, is a violation of German anti- discrimination legislation. 8.4 The agency of diversity management stakeholder
In view of relevant literature and in particular considering the findings coming from the diversity management stakeholder interviews and the company case study, this study suggests that the treatment of the Nazi-past, namely the collective national guilt of post-Holocaust Germany, has shaped the framework of diversity management in Germany and hence the agency of diversity management stakeholders in such a way that race related issues have been excluded from the diversity management agenda and debate. Nearly all stakeholders pointed out that there is an obvious taboo using terms such as racism or race discrimination in Germany. The problema with such terms was also faced carrying out the company case study. The usage of such terms caused resistance on part of the participants, which makes questioning race related issues a juggling act. Undoubtedly the memory and legacy of the Nazi-past has special implications in Germany (Fullbrook 1999; Rosenthal 1998).
One such implication is that in Germany the term racism does not apply to current racism and race discrimination at work. The public recognises racial discrimination only in relation to violent racism by Neo-Nazis. At the same time every day lived discrimination, and in particular racial discrimination at work remains not only ignored but also is not understood as racism. Accordingly, interview evidence identified the same argument. For instance, Cem, the head of a research centre (male and of Turkish ethnicty), argues:
People only talk about racism if ethnic minorities are physically attacked in particular if this people are Jews. This is a big sensation and then they are very sensitive. But for example race discrimination at work is never mentioned.
Adding to this Tina, an associate of a trade union (female and native-born German), explains:
There are these racists, this bad Nazis, yes and that is then immensely present in media. One is talking about that. But there are also other forms of discrimination. For example in education and in the labour market and such things and I believe that is a big difference. So, if one hears that skinheads are demonstrating on the street, that is horrible and should not happen, also because the whole world can see that. But this subtle discrimination yes, so subtle racism, I think for that there exists no awareness. So if it is about racism, the Nazis are discriminating and not we.
Accordingly van Dijk’s (2007) argues that the term racism seems to apply only to overt right-wing racism in Germany. However, what the above statement also shows is that there is no understanding regarding current race discrimination in the German society. For instance, Alibhai-Brown (1999) argues, “Germany has not really understood racism beyond the Holocaust”. These words however, seem to be more than true.
Consequently this taboo goes further. When I asked the participants to describe the debate regarding race discrimination at work, strikingly all interviewed stakeholders pointed out that there is nearly neither a public, political or scholarly debate about racial discrimination in employment in Germany. The research participant Jasmin, who is the head of a project, which mentors female ethnic minority academics (female and of Afghan ethnicity), indicates “Nobody is admitting that there is race discrimination in employment and in the actual debate nobody is talking openly about it”.
However, apart from three respondents all other interviewees explain the absence of a debate concerning racial discrimination in employment with the Germany’s Nazi-past. Following their words, the Nazi-past can be seen as a reason that it is almost impossible to talk about race related issues. Elke, an academic and diversity management trainer and consultant (female and native-born German), explains that as follows:
246 The debate is difficult because of the Nazi past. One is not talking about racism or discrimination or the whole topic and the whole topic gets also not connected with the Third Reich.
Adding to this Takuya, an academic and diversity management trainer (male and of Japanese ethinicity), explains:
This discussion should be always held in relation to history. In that connection I can see a huge gap in Germany, for example, the past, the Holocaust and the Nazis. This ignorance is an enigma for me. One is not trying to relate those things, but one cannot discuss for example race discrimination in isolation from the history.
It could be argued that this ignorance is not an enigma. It serves the avoidance of the Nazi-past and helps therefore to suppress unwanted feelings of collective guilt.
Furthermore, these implications do not only affect the agency of native-born German diversity management stakeholder, but also and in particular the agency of ethnic minority diversity management stakeholder. While all stakeholders described topics such as racism as taboo, surprisingly only ethnic minority stakeholders consider this taboo as a problem, predominantly in attempting to tackle race related issues. One example comes from Ercan, the head of a research centre (male and of Turkish ethnicity), which carried out a research project concerned with highly skilled ethnic minorities in Germany. In an attempt to explain the absence of terms such as race discrimination and racism in the published research report, he said:
It was on purpose that we didn’t use those terms. These terms are perceived as negative in public. These terms are causing a reflex in the wider public, which leads, and this is my personal observation and experience, to the fact that my conversational partner draws back from the
247 conversation. But I need the dialog, if we want to find a solution for this problem (he is talking about race discrimination at work). This means that if we want to find a solution for this problem we have to distance us from these as negative perceived terms and we have to find other neutral terms, which do not say you are discriminating, you are hostile against foreigners or you are a racist.
What we can see here is that in order to make native-born German dialog partners comfortable ethnic minority stakeholders prefer to not use negative biased terms. This can be clearly understood as a silencing mechanism, which renders the voice and therefore the agency of ethnic minority stakeholders.
These insights might explain why organisations still do not engage with race related issues and do not see managing ethnic diversity as pertinent. The discrimination topic is marked by a collective silence, which is clearly reflected in the field of diversity management and which clearly effects the adoption of the diversity management concept in organisations and further apart in Germany. In accordance to Bourdieu (1977), it could be argued that the German case shows how the diversity management field can structure the social settings of organisations in which the habitus of managing ethnic diversity operates and how based on the underlying habitus agency and strategies are exercised. It strikes that the discrimination topic has to be discussed regarding the attempt to include ethnic minority workers through organisational diversity management approaches.
Furthermore, to achieve race equality at work it is crucial to move beyond approaches and discourses, which merely incorporate marginalised groups into practices, devised to suit the interests of dominant groups. According to Bourdieu (1992) individuals are positioned in the field and use different strategies to enhance and secure their power position within the field. The current treatment of the German Nazi-past renders all attempts to deal with race related issues on the side of ethnic minority diversity management stakeholders and makes it
248 consequently impossible for them to address the issue of race discrimination at work.
Apparently history cannot be changed. However, what can be changed is the treatment of history. In the case of Germany the change of the treatment of history could open up new ways of engagement regarding race related issues and diversity management. Therefore, it is foremost necessary to establish a self- critical discourse on the country’s guilt, which also should be related to current racism. Additionally this self critical-discourse should be held in relation to how the treatment of collective guilt influences current debates on, and the engagement with race related issues. Germany has finally to understand racism beyond the Holocaust, which means that the existence of current race discrimination has to be recognised and consequently brought into debate. In the first instance, this will surely cause unease, particularly regarding the issue of national guilt and the therewith-connected accustomed avoidance of race related issues. However, attempting to achieve change regarding the treatment of race related issues, it is necessary to break this too long maintained taboo. Surely this will be a challenging task, particularly considering that according to Rensmann (2004: 172) “in a country as Germany where people strongly identify with their nation, feelings of group-based guilt and their expression, which can harm conventional national identity narratives, tend to be under a severe taboo”. However, he then argues that it is particular the strong identification with the German nation-state, which prevents Germans from a self-critical discourse on the country’s guilt.
8.5 Conclusion
This chapter explored the interplay of the field, the organisational habitus and the agency of diversity management in Germany. According to Bourdieu, “field analysis calls attention to the social conditions of struggle that shape cultural production” (Swartz 1997:119). The examination of the field gave us insights about existing power relations and how these power relations are utilised to preserve the power relations in the field. Preserving existing power relations leads
249 to the preservation of structures and habitusses. There is a dominance of native- born German stakeholders in the field of diversity management in Germany, particularly female ones. As a result, the gender issue dominates the scientific discourse on diversity management. The fact that the diversity management topic was initially introduced and advocated by predominately female native-born scholars and practitioners could explain why race related issues are not as considered as they should be in terms of diversity management. It moreover gives a possible explanation for the absence of an ethnic minority voice in the debate concerned with diversity management in Germany.
Strikingly, the focus on women equality in relation to diversity management reoccurred in the organisation investigated for this study. While there is no habitus of managing ethnic diversity in this company, there is some attention in terms of woman equality. The few measures carried out under the company’s diversity management agenda addresses solely woman equality. This is rather unsurprising, as according to Bourdieu that a field structures the social settings of organisations in which habitus operates (Bourdieu 1977). By exploring at the organisational habitus of this company it could be argued that what we see is a reproduction of the structures inherent in the wider field of diversity management in Germany. Definitely it could be argued that the macro contexts of diversity management influences the organisational habitus of diversity management in such a way that race related issues are excluded from its agenda.
A second influence coming from the wider field of diversity management is the fact that the notion of diversity management is not thought in relation to race equality and racial anti-discrimination. This notion is similarly present in the organisational context of diversity management. Lastly, it was shown that social activity in terms of integracsim and symbolic violence influence the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity. Particularly, the notion of integration undermines the overdue call for managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Organisations still do not view the management of ethnic diversity as pertinent; the same does apply to measure, which would address for instance race
250 equality. Internalised stereotypes towards ethnic minority workers due to the exercised symbolic violence legitimise to draw on concept such as integration rather than on diversity management and race equality when thinking of the management of ethnic minority workers.
Furthermore this, it was shown that the global diversity management strategy of the examined MNC failed to consider the local context of diversity management in Germany. The insights mentioned above indicate that “managing global diversity effectively requires an understanding of cross-national differences in the definition and understanding of diversity” (Nishii and Özbilgin 2008: 1884). Ely and Thomas (2001: 237) pointed out „how context might shape people’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviours [...] and how these, in turn, might influence the role of cultural diversity in the work group’s functioning“. Using the example of Germany, this study might cast some light on how the social, economic and historical context of a country shapes and influences the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity, as well as individual behaviour.
Finally, the examination of the agency of diversity management stakeholders on Germany revealed that the macro context of managing ethnic diversity not only manifests in the organisational habitus of managing diversity but also in the agency of diversity management stakeholders. Habitus not only governs the conduct of action and interaction in the organisation (Mahar et al. 1990), but also shapes individual and collective response to the present and future and mediates the effects of external structures to produce action (Swartz 1997: 69). Hence, the concept of habitus brings the subjective dimension of human agency into the analysis (Grenfell and James 1998: 15) and functions thereby as a bridge between structure and agency. As described in earlier sections of this thesis, race related issues are taboo in public and also political debates, due the national guilt resulting from the German Nazi-past. The discrimination topic is marked by a collective silence, which is clearly reflected in the field of diversity management and which clearly effects the adoption of the diversity management concept in organisations and further apart in Germany. The difficulty of handling the Nazi-
251 past occurred in the scope of the case study company as well as during the stakeholder interviews. Silencing such topics renders the voice and therefore the agency of ethnic minority stakeholders. These insights might explain why organisations still do not engage with race related issues and do not see managing ethnic diversity as pertinent. Obviously, the current treatment of this past renders all attempts to deal with race related issues on the side of ethnic minority diversity management stakeholders and makes it consequently impossible for them to address the issue of race discrimination at work.
In conclusion it could be argued that utilising Bourdieu’s theoretical concepts of field, habitus, agency and symbolic violence in tandem with Layder´s research map provided a useful framework for this study. This approach enhanced the understanding of how micro, meso and macro phenomena influence behaviour and social activities and how the interrelationships between these layers of activity are located in their respective historical context. It materialised that macro, meso and micro layers are not independent of one another; rather they exist in state of relational interdependence. It shows the necessity to consider all three levels of reality as well as their interrelation, if one wants to understand the management of ethnic diversity on the organisational level. Only investigating the organisational level attempting to acquire insights of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity may not provide the same deeper levelled insights gained in this PhD research.
252 Chapter Nine
Discussion and conclusion
9.1 Introduction
This thesis examined the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany deploying a contextual, multi-levelled and relational approach. This approach revealed the complex nature of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity, which is now presented in this concluding chapter of the thesis. The conclusion consists of eight further sections. In the first section, I revisit the original research questions on the basis of the key themes, which emerged from the field study. After providing critical insights into three research questions of the thesis, I offer a general conclusion regarding the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity. I moreover, address the key question of this thesis, which is: why do organisations remain resistant to managing ethnic diversity?
Following this, the next sections identify the original, the theoretical and the methodological contribution as well as implications for policy and practice of this work. Further two sections provide firstly what, with retrospection, I would do differently in terms of research design and methods and secondly, suggestions for future research. The chapter closes with concluding remarks.
9.2 Revisiting the research questions
The aim of this thesis is to provide a critical realist account of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. This research project draws on data gathered from fieldwork utilising different qualitative research methods, such as a single company case study, in-depth interviews, visual data in form of photographs, observations and a focus group. Thirty semi-structured interviews with German stakeholders have been carried out. The thirty participants were equality and diversity actors coming from different sub-fields of the diversity
253 management field in Germany. Fifteen out of the thirty participants are minority ethnic participants and ten of them are people of Turkish ethnicity. The other fifteen are native-born Germans. Including ethnic minority stakeholder provides an ethnic minority perspective, which certainly is not frequently considered in German equality and diversity research and which is of particular interest when examining symbolic violence in relation to people of Turkish ethnicity in Germany. The company case study includes twelve interviews: four interviews with members of the human resources department of the company, four interviews with managers from different departments of the company and four interviews with employees in a none-managerial position. Additionally, the company case study draws on visual data, a focus group, observations and company data.
The research philosophy of this thesis was informed by critical realism and draws on Bourdieu (1984, 1992, 1998) and critical realist scholar Layder (1993, 1998), based on a contextual, multilevel and multilayered analysis of reality. The organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany was examined through this framework in order to answer the central question of this thesis: why do organisations yet keep being resistant against managing ethnic diversity? The relational and analytical framework interpreted and operationalised Bourdieu’s key concepts, field, habitus, symbolic violence and his vision of agency in the organisational context, in order to explore and explain macro, meso and micro level influences on the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. These concepts and his vision of agency were used to answer three research questions as briefly revisited in the following sections.
9.2.1 How does the larger historical context manifest in the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity and in the agency of diversity management stakeholders in Germany?
This question examines the influence of the larger historical context on the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity and on the agency of diversity management stakeholder in Germany. According to Layder (1993) it is important
254 to consider history in order to understand a social phenomenon. Focussing on the larger historical context as well as on historical dynamics, in order to answer a research question can provide an answer to how a particular feature of social life evolved in its current form, since history influences behaviour and social activity in general. Drawing on Layder’s research, the element of history represents the temporal dimension through which all the other elements move. This is also reflected in this thesis. The German Nazi-past and particularly the treatment of this past has been a reoccurring issue on all levels of analysis. Chapter Two provided a literature review, which discussed the German Nazi-past and the therewith-connected national guilt (see Stern 1994; Olick 1998; Safran 2000; Cohen 2001; Fulbrook 1999, 2007, 2009) in relation to the management of ethnic diversity in Germany. In this chapter I argued that it is of vast importance not only to concentrate on the history itself, but rather to focus on the treatment of history (see also Özbilgin 2010). This is important, since this chapter illustrated that the post-holocaust collective guilt, which must be seen as the treatment of the German Nazi-past and not as the history itself, shaped the contemporary diversity management agenda in such a way that race related issues are excluded from it. For instance, the discrimination topic is marked by a collective silence, which affects the field of diversity management as well as the organisational adoption of the diversity management concept in Germany. Moreover, terms such as racism are taboo in Germany, or only used in relation to violent forms of racism and not for example in relation to racism at work (see also Dovidio and Gaertner 1986; Van Dyk 1995).
The single company case study was used to explain the impact of the larger historical context on the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity, which is explored in Chapter Eight. It is shown that race related issues are not considered at all in the diversity management agenda of the examined company. However, this absence of race related issues in organisational diversity management approaches seems not to be a single instance. According to findings from a study carried out by Köppel et al. (2007), the management of ethnic diversity in Germany is lagging behind in an international comparison and more
255 than half of German companies simply do not view the management of ethnic diversity as pertinent. This is rather unsurprising, since race related issues are due to the German Nazi-past taboo in the German context (Van Dyk 1995). The existent taboo might provide one possible explanation for the absence of race related issues in the diversity management approach of this company. Case study evidence revealed that race related issues generated an immense resistance on side of the participants in this company. National guilt related to the Holocaust crimes has deeply affected the collective memory and even nowadays guilt plays a key role in many facets of contemporary German social and political life (Safran 2000). Ignoring and avoiding race related issues serves the purpose of not being reminded of the Nazi-past, which would cause unwanted guilt feelings. Conversely, this reaction can also be understood as a mechanism to dilute current attempts at combating race discrimination, as: if they do not talk about it, they cannot be doing it.
Organisations are part of social life and hence, it is no surprise to find similar resistance regarding race related issues in organisational setting. This resistance then translates into organisational practice and impacts organisational diversity management approaches in such a way that race related issues are not part of the diversity management agenda. Diversity and equality concerns and patterns of disadvantage in the labour market are historically constructed, and they draw the framework of diversity agenda at the national, organisational and individual level (Prasad and Mills 1997; Özbilgin and Tatli 2008). This finding bridges agency and structure in showing how the individual agency of actors avoiding race related issues translates into structures and practice in terms of organisational diversity management approaches.
However, there is no such resistance in for instance terms of women equality. The company’s diversity management approach is focused on women equality, and so is predominately the diversity management field in Germany (Koall et al. 2002; Krell 1996, 2008; Vedder 2006). This means that there is no general resistance regarding differences, or matters of equality, but clearly there is a resistance
256 regarding race related issues. This brings us to a second explanation for the absence of race related issues in organisational diversity management approaches, besides the above provided explanation. It could be argued that it is not only the national guilt hindering the development of an emancipatory diversity management agenda in terms of ethnicity. A further explanation is the fact that female native-born German scholars and practitioners historically dominate the diversity management field (Bednarz-Braun 2004a; Lenz 1996). A domination that still persists and that can be partly made responsible for the focus on women equality and the absence of race related issues in organisational diversity management approaches.
These findings illustrated the importance to consider the larger historical context when transferring diversity management as a business process from the headquarters of a MNC to a foreign subsidiary. The MNC under scrutiny failed to capture the local historical context as well as the local requirements in terms of for instance legal obligations, putting thereby the MNC under financial and legal risk. The German subsidiary not only does not consider race related issues in its diversity management approach, which opposes the MNC’s global diversity strategy, but also does ignore legal obligations in for instance not providing a contact point for employees in case they are discriminated against. This is a clear violation of European anti-discrimination legislation. Altogether, this study showed that management concepts, such as diversity management, cannot easily travel from one context to the other without taking the local context into consideration. This finding complies with for instance Nishii and Özbilgin (2008: 1884), who argue that global diversity management requires understanding cross- national differences in the definition and in the understanding of diversity.
How the larger historical context manifests in the agency of diversity management stakeholder was discussed in Chapter Eight. Native-born German diversity management stakeholders did not address race related issues, such as for example race discrimination at work. There is a startling ignorance regarding such issues and obvious problems using terms such as racism or race discrimination.
257 Certainly the memory and legacy of the Nazi-past has special implications in Germany (Fullbrook 1999; Rosenthal 1998). Considering these insights, it is rather unsurprising that race related issues are largely left out in organisational diversity management agendas. However, this taboo does not only affect native- born German diversity management stakeholders, but also ethnic minority diversity management stakeholders. The findings are very interesting as they show that the current treatment of the German Nazi-past renders all attempts to deal with race related issues on the side of ethnic minority diversity management stakeholders. The existent taboo regarding race related issues is utilised to render the voice of ethnic minority diversity management stakeholders. Native-born German diversity management stakeholders merely incorporate marginalised groups into practices and also discourses, which are devised to suit their own interests, such as the preservation of existent power relations in the field of diversity management or/ and in the wider society in Germany. Therefore, I continue arguing that it is important to break this taboo in order to finally enable ethnic minorities to address and articulate their own issues and rights in the German society. I argue that while history itself cannot be changed, the treatment of history can be changed, as it only exists because of its every day reproduction of individuals.
9.2.2 How does symbolic violence manifest in the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany and in the agency of diversity management stakeholders?
In Chapter Six, symbolic violence was defined as a partly unconscious instrument of domination and an imposing system of symbolism and meaning upon subordinated groups or classes in order to secure the social reproduction of relations of domination (Jenkins 1992; Bourdieu 1994). Bourdieu (1984) argues that symbolic violence is utilised to conserve current classifications in matters such as gender, nation, religion, age and social status. In examining visual symbolic violence against ethnic minority Turks, Chapter Six illustrated how symbolic violence is utilised to conserve current classifications in terms of ethnicity. Visual symbolic violence can be transported through different channels, for example through print media as well as audio-visual media. Ethnic minority
258 Turks are portrayed in a negative way and as being in deficit. The internalised symbolic violence regarding ethnic minority Turks takes place in such a way that exclusion and inclusion are naturalised and experienced as legitimate. Most strikingly, it was shown that the internalised violence manifests within the self- consciousness of individuals as well as in a shared organisational habitus, which undermines the overdue call for race equality and the management of ethnic diversity.
Moreover, research findings revealed that the failure to employ workers of Turkish ethnicity is legitimated in the examined company with internalised arguments referring to people of Turkish ethnicity being deficient across various job criteria, or in simply denying the existence of highly skilled or simply skilled ethnic minority workers. This legitimacy shadows the existing power relations and makes them often unrecognisable to, and invisible to individuals who experience them (Kim 2004). As a consequence, native-born German individuals consent to the dominant view that ethnic minorities are in deficit. For instance, interview participants, stakeholders as well as company case study interview participants, made endless streams of reference particularly regarding alleged missing German language proficiency, on side of ethnic minorities. Clearly, the visual portrayal of ethnic minorities undermines the diversity of their experiences, agency and humanity. Furthermore, those mostly negative presentations of ethnic minorities support ethnocentric views and stereotypes and are constructing negative images of ethnic minorities, which encourage discrimination towards ethnic minorities (Weber-Menges 2005).
Representing ethnic minority workers as in deficit serves securing the social reproduction of relations of domination. The research findings suggest that symbolic violence functions as a unconscious mechanism of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in such a way that the exclusion of ethnic minority workers appears to be legitimate. Most strikingly, ethnic minority workers loose their “entitlement” for race equality and diversity management, since they are not seen as equally skilled, but rather as in deficit. The agency of
259 minority ethnic citizens remains ignored and their self-descriptions are often dismissed. Company case study interview evidence showed that there is a shared belief that ethnic minorities need help in order to develop skills, such as for example German language skills, rather than race equality.
Examining the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in tandem with symbolic violence against ethnic minority Turks in Germany provided insights of deeper levelled structures, which underpin the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany and guide the agency of diversity management stakeholders. Utilising both Bourdieuan (1984, 1994, 1998) theoretical concepts, symbolic violence and habitus, in order to understand the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity helped to reveal the deeper-rooted hidden structures underneath the surface level, which guide and constitute the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity as well as the agency of diversity management stakeholders. This deeper-rooted hidden structures need to be targeted if one seriously aims for the labour market inclusion of ethnic minority workers through diversity management.
However, Chapter Six not only discussed visual symbolic violence, but also linguistic symbolic violence. Interview evidence suggested that linguistic symbolic violence prevents the development of an emancipator linguistic repertoire concerning race related issues. This finding is clearly connected with what I described in a previous section of this chapter regarding the influence of the larger historical context, namely the German Nazi-past (Fulbrook 1999, 2009). It furthermore complies with Layder’s (1993, 1998) view, who argues that the element of history represents the temporal dimension through which all the other elements move. It moreover shows the interwoven nature of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity.
As mentioned previously, race discrimination and race related issues are silenced (Van Dyik 1995). This is partly possible by not providing suitable terms to tackle such issues, which shows us the power and effects of linguistic symbolic violence.
260 Answering earlier the question of how the larger historical context influences the agency of diversity management stakeholders, I already described how ethnic minority diversity management stakeholders are silenced and left without voice. However, what I want to highlight at this point is that this process of silencing ethnic minorities is merely possible through exercising linguistic symbolic violence. This in particular relevant, since only the dominant group has the main symbolic power to provide and produce terms concerning for instance race related issues (Sayad 2004).
For instance, linguistic symbolic violence manifests in the agency of ethnic minority stakeholders in such way that race related issues remain largely untouched, particularly when talking or discussing with native-born Germans. Interview participants described that raising issues such as racism or race discrimination in for example employment generates an immense resistance on side of native-born Germans. As ethnic minority diversity management stakeholders are aware of this underlying habitus, they adjust their behaviour in not articulating such issues and in not using terms such as racism or race discrimination. This was observed for example during a migrant representatives meeting. Moreover, interview evidence showed that ethnic minorities sometimes reproduce the dominant view on ethnic minorities. This can be partly explained by the internalisation of symbolic violence throughout the life course of an ethnic minority individual.
These insights show us the power and effects of linguistic symbolic violence. Not providing suitable terms and silencing race related issues ensures the reproduction of established hierarchies, which helps to ensure that one group dominates another. Clearly this cycle needs to be broken, in order to enable ethnic minorities to develop an emancipator linguistic repertoire concerning race related issues. However, only those in power are able to break this cycle and to provide ethnic minorities with voice in order to address their interests. This is not done so far. However, one major contribution of this study is that the ethnic
261 minority perspective is brought into the field of diversity management in Germany.
9.2.3 What is the nature of the relationship between the notion of integration and diversity management in Germany?
As described in Chapter Three of this thesis, the notion of integration is the dominant concept in the management of ethnic diversity in Germany (Hoffmann- Nowotny 1973; Esser 1980; Bericht der unabhängigen Kommission Zuwanderung 2001; Bericht der Beauftragten der Bundesregierung, 2005; Berlin Institut für Bevölkerung und Entwicklung 2009). In Germany integration polices and measures are deployed in order to aid the “better integration” of ethnic minorities, instead of for example diversity management or measures regarding equal opportunities at work. This is problematic, as usually the dominant group of a society holds the power to define the notion of integration as well as the contents and goals of governmental integration policies (Sayad 2004). Hence, the discourse regarding the integration of ethnic minorities, as well as the development of governmental integration policies, is based on an unequal balance of power. As a result, there is for instance nearly no research available exploring the issue of integration from an ethnic minority perspective. One further outcome is that integration literature predominantly focuses on ethnic minorities as a source of potential problems (Bourdieu 2004). Particular references are made regarding ethnic minority Turks, which are seen as the most problematic group in terms of integration. Ethnic minority Turks are widely portrayed as unwilling and unable to integrate into German society (see for example Berlin Institut für Bevölkerung und Entwicklung 2009). Such negative references go beyond the integration literature, as described in Chapter Six, which examined visual symbolic violence against ethnic minority Turks in Germany.
Chapter Seven examined the corrosion of the notion of integration with racial bias. The chapter illustrated how this corrosion undermines the overdue proposal of equal opportunities at work and its influence on employment practices of ethnic minority workers. Interview evidence suggests that the racial biased and
262 ethnocentric notion of integration feeds into the habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Hence, integration, or in this case integracism, can be understood as one underlying mechanism of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. It materialised that the notion of integration comes along with racism, underlined by symbolic violence and ethnocentric views. Unsurprisingly, the racial biased and ethnocentric notion of integration feeds into the notion of diversity management.
Contrary to diversity management with its inclusive notion, the notion of integration is set out to assimilate ethnic minorities into the dominant white organisational culture, in order to create a dominant heterogeneous culture (Wrench 2003). This stands in clear opposition to the concept of diversity management. As outlined in Chapter Four of this thesis, diversity management in Germany does not incorporate for the management of ethnic diversity central aspects such as race equality and anti-discrimination. This can be explained by the fact that such issues are largely silenced in the political and public debate, which once more brings us back to the tyranny of history and the treatment of the German Nazi-past in contemporary Germany (see Stern 1994; Olick 1998; Safran 2000; Cohen 2001; Fulbrook 1999, 2007, 2009). Shockingly, stakeholder interview evidence as well as company case study interview evidence revealed the internalisation of the racial biased and ethnocentric notion of integration on side of the participants, which clearly undermines the need to manage ethnic diversity in organisation. This internalisation is rather unsurprising as individuals usually assent to dominant behavioural schema currently utilised in the field (Kim 2004). Interview evidence suggests that native-born Germans still request the assimilation into the dominant culture from ethnic minorities. Moreover, members of ethnic minorities are not seen as equal so far, which undermines the need for the management of ethnic diversity or equal opportunities at work.
263 9.3 Original contribution
This section starts with a summary of the theoretical and methodological contribution of this doctoral research to the diversity management scholarship and to the wider field of management and organisational studies. Then, I discuss the policy and practice implications of the findings of the thesis.
9.3.1 Theoretical contribution
Diversity management has not been studied in relation to the larger historical context in Germany. However, in order to aid the better understanding of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity, the notion of diversity management needs to be located in the larger historical context, particularly considering the specific historical context of Germany. This study located the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in the larger historical context in Germany. In doing so, this thesis provides an original analysis of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Based on the fieldwork evidence, this PhD research identified that multi-level influences, as well as the larger historical context account for the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. It appeared that the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity as well as the agency of diversity management stakeholders are trapped in history, namely the German Nazi-past. Strikingly, the post-holocaust collective guilt (see Stern 1994; Olick 1998; Safran 2000; Cohen 2001; Fulbrook 1999, 2007, 2009) shaped the contemporary diversity management agenda in such a way that race related issues are excluded from it. This might explain why organisations still do not engage with race related issues and do not see managing ethnic diversity as pertinent.
In conclusion, these insights show that it is not only the history itself we should concentrate on, but also and in particular the treatment of history (Özbilgin 2010). For instance, the discrimination topic is marked by a collective silence, which effects clearly the adoption of the diversity management concept in Germany. Strikingly, this silence affects ethnic minority diversity and equality stakeholders in a way that they are unable to tackle race related issues. As a result, they remain without voice in the field of diversity management and equal opportunities. These insights are very valuable, since issues such as silence and voice have not been studied in relation to diversity management in Germany. However, Bell et al. (2011: 143) argue, “… that increasing workforce diversity necessitates new and different voice mechanisms.” Undoubtedly, the larger historical context has a strong impact on the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity and on the agency of diversity management stakeholders in Germany. However, in order to achieve social and organisational change it is necessary to break the existent taboo regarding race related issues. This would mean for example that the race discrimination topic has to be discussed, attempting to include ethnic minority workers through organisational diversity management approaches.
Moreover, this study revealed two further issues accounting for the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. This PhD project indentified integracism and symbolic violence as underlying mechanisms of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Until now, diversity management was studied in isolation from the notion of integration in Germany. However, this thesis explored the nature of the relationship between the notion of integration and diversity management in Germany, which provides one original contributions to our understanding of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. The racial biased and ethnocentric notion of integration and symbolic violence against ethnic minorities influences the organisational habitus of managing diversity in such a way that the management of ethnic diversity is not seen as pertinent in the organisational context. Ethnic minority workers are perceived as unequal to native-born German workers, or better said as deficient, in terms of for instance skills and experience (Berlin Institut für Bevölkerung und Entwicklung 2009). As a result, ethnic minorities do not qualify for equal opportunities, but rather for help in order to gain skills and experience. This can be viewed as a major error, if aiming for equal opportunities
265 and race equality. It could be argued that native-born Germans have a feeling of superiority towards ethnic minority workers.
A further original contribution to our understanding of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany derives from examining the manifestation of symbolic violence in the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany and in the agency of diversity management stakeholders. I am the first to use both concepts symbolic violence and habitus in diversity management research in the German context. It was shown in this thesis that symbolic violence influences employment practices as well as the management of ethnic diversity in this company. It materialised that both, symbolic violence as well as integracism can be viewed as deep levelled mechanisms of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in this company. This thesis provides insights of the interwoven and interrelated nature of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Moreover, this thesis contributes to the limited subject of diversity management and race related issues within an organisational context in Germany.
Considering the insights described above, it could be argued that at this stage diversity management is not the right instrument to aid the better integration of ethnic minority workers into the German labour market. According to for instance Wrench (2003), it would be logical if the development and implementation of diversity would follow a sequence of chronological stages, in order to avoid a solely what he calls celebrating diversity approach. Wrench recommends six chronological stages if one seriously aims for race equality in employment. The first stage “training the immigrants” aims to provide ethnic minorities with language skills and to integrate them into the society. The second stage “making cultural allowances” refers to allowances, which are made for specific religious or cultural needs of minority groups within the organisation. The remaining stages are “challenging racist attitudes”, “combating discrimination”, “equal opportunities policies with positive action” and lastly “diversity management”, which implies two stages, firstly valuing diversity and secondly managing
266 diversity. According to Wrench, stage number four must be viewed as one of the most important stages.
A more ambitious leap of imagination is called for to get the anti- discrimination stage, partly because this entails the more uncomfortable recognition that racial discrimination can exist ´normally´ in organisations and can be perpetrated by ordinary people who are not conventionally (Wrench 2003:6).
However, this recognition that racial discrimination exists in organisations is not easy to develop in a context were terminology concerning race related issues is absent and issues such as racism are silenced. To what extent the integration of ethnic minority workers into the German labour market can be achieved with diversity management is more than questionable.
9.3.2 Methodological contribution
This section provides three main methodological contributions. The first contribution refers to the multilevel and multilayered approach of this study. Further contributions can be drawn from the multi-methods framework and the reflexive perspective deployed for this study. This study draws on Bourdieu (1984, 1994, 1998) and critical realist scholar Layder (1993) and is based on a contextual, multilevel and multilayered analysis of organisational reality. The relational and analytical framework interpreted and operationalised Bourdieu’s key concepts, field, habitus and symbolic violence in the organisational context, in order to explore and explain macro, meso and micro level influences on the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. On that account, this study considered a relational model between agency and structure and seeked to transcend the objective-subjective divide. The relational model of micro-meso- macro dimensions captured the space, the history of and the interplay between layered social phenomena (Özbilgin and Tatli 2005). Such approach offered the
267 possibility to fulfil the obvious need for adequate concepts in the field of theory and research, and politics and management practice (Glastra 1996).
Moreover, by situating the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in the larger historical context at micro, meso and macro levels, this research provides two original contributions. Besides the provision of insights into an under- researched area in the literature, this study also contributes to literature concerned with organisational change by presenting a relational, multilevel model for understanding habitus in organisations. Lastly, this study is the first study deploying a multilevel, contextual and relational approach in the area of diversity management studies in the German context.
Critical realism suggests that the deployment of different research methods might be helpful in examining different layers of social reality. This study draws on multiple sources of data: secondary data in the form of scholarly and practitioner literature overview, semi-structured interviews with stakeholders, a single company case study, visual data, a focus group, observations and a research diary. This multi-method framework allowed me, the researcher; to explore the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in its complex multi- layered nature. Using various methods not only reduced the limitations of every single method, but also increased the reliability and validity of the findings through triangulation.
Lastly, a researcher must be constantly aware of their own position and set of internalised structures, and how these can bias their objectivity. This research rejects the possibility that full objectivity is achievable in the course of a research project. However, awareness of ones own bias can be made through reflexivity. Reflexivity is the precondition to specify unconscious presuppositions and complete the internalization of a more sufficient epistemology (Bourdieu 1992). A research diary was kept in order to aid reflexivity throughout the research process. In addition to the research diary, I documented my observations and perceptions during this research project. Additionally, in the methodology chapter, I gave a
268 brief overview of my own personal experience as an ethnic minority Greek in Germany and how this influenced my research choice and the way a conducted this PhD study. However, I not only recognised my own set of internalised structures, but also the subjective character of the participants, who took part in this study.
9.3.3 Implications for policy and practice
Drawing on interview, literature review and case study evidence, this study suggests a number of implications for policy and practice. First and foremost, in order to achieve social as well as organisational change it is necessary to break the existent taboo regarding race related issues. I demonstrated that it is necessary to move beyond approaches and discourses, which merely incorporate marginalised groups into practices and also discourses, devised to suit the interests of dominant groups. The findings of this study clearly indicate the urgent need to bring race related issues into the mainstream discourse. Therefore, it is important to finally break the existent taboo regarding race related issues. The current state of rendering ethnic minority voice in utilising a taboo has to stop. This would finally enable ethnic minorities to address and vocalise their own issues and rights in a society. Apparently, the current treatment of the German Nazi-past renders all attempts to deal with race related issues on the side of ethnic minority diversity management stakeholders. Therefore I continue arguing that while history itself cannot be changed, the treatment of history can be changed, as it only exists because of its every day reproduction of individuals.
Acknowledging that a strong national identity fosters that people tend to taboo expressions of national guilt, which can harm conventional national identity narratives, we then examined the historical creation of the German nation-state, national identity and citizenship policies. It became clear that the current definition of the German national identity and current citizenship policies do not comply with current realities regarding the consistence of Germany’s population.
269 Therefore I argue that first of all Germany’s national identity needs to transform in response to its actual population. For instance Bourdieu (2004: xiv) argues
the immigrant obliges us to rethink completely the question of the legitimate foundation of citizenship and of relations between citizen and state, nation or nationality. Being absent both from his place of origin and his place of arrival, he forces us to rethink not only the instinctive rejection which, because it regards the state as an expression of the nation, justifies itself by claiming to base citizenship on a linguistic and cultural community (if not racial community), but also the false assimilationist ‘generosity’ which, convinced that the state, armed with education, can produce the nation, may conceal a chauvinism of the universal.
German society denied for far too long that it is an immigration country. Today Germany consists of a diverse ethnic population. Accepting this and that Germany is an immigration country needs to happen urgently. According to Fulbrook (1999) the process of transforming a national identity in response to national guilt can be expected to be particularly difficult in political cultures like Germany in which affective bonds toward collective national identity are particularly strong. Yes, it might be a difficult task to transform Germany’s national identity and in particularly considering the burden of national guilt. However, I argue that a critical self-reflecting discourse in relation to how the treatment of collective guilt influences current debates on, and the engagement with race related issues is needed. Such self-critical discourse could present a first step regarding the development of a new national identity, which includes all members of the German population and not only native-born German ones. It could also open up a new ways of discourse, which does not refer to ‘ we and them’, but rather sees ethnic minorities as a part of the nation and not as outsiders.
Moreover, the transformation of Germany’s national identity would offer new ways and opportunities for ethnic minorities to finally indentify with a nation they are mostly born in. In particular, changes in citizenship policies, for example
270 granting the permission for dual citizenship, would stop treating citizens unequally regarding their ethic background.
Reflecting on expert interviews and the case study, I demonstrated how symbolic violence is practiced everyday against people of Turkish ethnicity. Failure to employ workers of Turkish ethnicity is legitimated in my study with internalised arguments referring to people of Turkish ethnicity being deficient across various job criteria. In order to break this vicious cycle of violence, change is needed and change does not happen by itself. For change to happen, political will is important as well as leadership for such change. So far the attempted change concentrates only on the discourse level in Germany, but changing discourse provides little impetus for real social change. As Fairclough (1998, 2003) states, socially constructive effects of discourse are contingent upon resistance of structure and habitus. Achieving cultural, social and organisational change requires not only discourse change but also interventions at different levels and structures, and habituses have to be targeted.
A government department may be tasked to lead the change. The legal recognition of racial inequality, imposed by European Union legislation, seems not to have a large effect so far. For example, the federal Anti-Discrimination Agency has been highly criticised for failing to take its duty serious. Translating the Equal Treatment law into Turkish or Russian could be good starting points. However, these options have been previously rejected by the agency. However, this might explain why in Germany only twenty-six per cent of the population know their rights against being discriminated. This proportion is considerably lower than that of other western and northern European countries (European Commission, 2009). This is particularly surprising considering that one duty of the agency is to promote equality as well as to inform about equality legislation. I argue that providing the Equal Treatment Law in for ethnic minorities relevant languages is a basic need. Furthermore, the agency conducted only three studies since being established in 2006. Race related issues are not the main concern of any of the studies. Given the fact that there is no database, which could give information about the dimensions of racial discrimination cases or discrimination fields
271 (Clayton 2001), this has to be seen as a major omission. However, there are other examples, which show that the German government has not considered race equality laws seriously so far. I argue that a positive attitude towards race equality by the government could make a significant difference.
What also needs to change is the representation of ethnic minorities in the media landscape as well as in public life in Germany. Regarding the media representation, I propose that the portrayal of ethnic minorities has to include positive considerations in order to inform the public imagination in a more balanced way regarding ethnic minorities. This needs the development of a positive vocabulary and imagery regarding ethnic minorities, requiring concerted efforts on side of the dominant group, as this change in language and imagery is not going to happen on its own.
The face of Germany, as represented abroad, also needs to change. Germany needs to develop a more inclusive approach towards ethnic minorities, as well as an inclusive approach regarding the definition of “Germanness”. Ethnic minorities have to be considered and portrayed as visible and valued members of the society in Germany. A governmental equality watchdog for print and electronic media could conduct race equality proofing with a view to combat negative portrayals of ethnic minorities in Germany. Additionally I recommend a race quota as an excellent tool in order to increase the positive representation of ethnic minorities in media.
The representation of ethnic minorities in public life is another important factor for change in Germany. As we saw in this thesis, a shared habitus towards workers of Turkish ethnicity prevents organisations from employing them, even when they are highly skilled. Changing the face of the public sector through race quotas would represent an important step towards better representation of ethnic minorities. It would also help to free the so far untapped potential of the ethnic minority workforce in Germany. It is not only the call for race equality, which shows us the need for the inclusion of ethnic minority workers, Germany cannot
272 longer afford to have a central government workforce drawn only from native born Germans. In Western Europe, it is widely acknowledged that the integration of ethnic minority working population potential is needed (Fotakis 2000) in order to balance the effect of increasing labour shortages and insecure welfare states (Esping-Andersen 2001) and in order to meet the challenge of the demographic change as a result of ageing societies (Healy and Schwarz-Woelzl 2007; European Commission 2007). Unfortunately, the high unemployment rates among skilled ethnic minority workers demonstrate a lack of understanding that the face of talent is now very diverse in Germany.
In order to make race equality policies effective and to ensure that its aims are being achieved, there is a need for ethnic monitoring (CRE 2005). Ethnic monitoring can help to “reveal patterns of racial inequality; identify any barriers or obstacles that might account for the differences between racial groups; and help identify remedies to such problems” (CRE 1992: 9). Without ethnic monitoring there is a substantial risk that people will just see the policy as paying lip service to race equality (CRE 2005). I propose that public bodies in particular should be tasked to implement measures to prevent and combat race discrimination.
This study also has implications for organisations. Ethnic minority workers constitute a valuable asset to organisations. Failure to recognise the potential of ethnic minority workers is likely to prove counterproductive to the competitiveness of German industries, in particular in the light of increasing labour shortages and demographic changes. Clearly the insights of this study call for the promotion of equality, diversity and inclusion of ethnic minority workers in the organisational context. This requires first of all a change in attitude towards ethnic minority workers and, secondly, the long due recognition of the fact that racial discrimination does exist in the organisational context. Organisations need to take equality, diversity and inclusion seriously in order to benefit from the so far untapped ethnic minority working potential. A first step would be the comprehensive implementation of existent race equality legislation. For instance, installing a watchdog could be a useful measure. A further implication for
273 organisations, particularly for MNC’s is the in this study highlighted relevance to consider the local context, including the larger historical context, when transferring management concepts to foreign subsidiaries. Failure to do so can not only put MNC’s under legal and financial risk, but also can result in divergent practice across subsidiaries in different countries.
9.7 Research limitations
This PhD study provides a number of rich insights regarding the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. Nevertheless, this study also has its limitations. I note four limitations. The first two limitations are related to the availability of time and resource in the scope of a PhD study. Time as well as recourses are often limited and play a significant role when conducting a research project. For instance, close to the end of my field study I was offered another company for the purpose of conducting a company case study. However, both time and recourses did not allow me to include a second case study in this PhD research.
The third limitation refers to difficulties in securing research access to some stakeholders for the stakeholder interviews. It was impossible to access for instance high-level politicians, responsible for issues such as for example integration or anti-discrimination. This experience shows how important it is to consider power relations when aiming to secure research access as a researcher. However, in order to overcome this dilemma, relevant integration or anti- discrimination policy documents were analysed for this study. Moreover, a small number of stakeholder interviews had to be conducted via Skype, as limited capacity in terms of time and financial recourses were restricting me in travelling to Germany for each individual interview, particularly at the end of the field- phase. The small number of thirty stakeholder interviews partially accounts to the difficulties in securing research access. The number of interviews is small to make generalisations. However, similar studies on equality and diversity actors also include interviews with a maximum of thirty participants (Özbilgin and Tatli
274 2007; Kirton and Greene 2006). Besides, qualitative research is usually not conducted for producing generalisation, but rather in order to understand lived experiences of a group of participants.
Lastly, interviewing native-born German participants was a juggling act. As described in Chapter Two and throughout the analysis chapters, there is a taboo regarding race related issues in Germany. I had to ask my questions often very carefully in order not to let feelings of resistance emerge on side of native-born German participants. Some of the native-born German participants have been even reluctant to talk about race related issues at all. It was often difficult to address race related issues, since sufficient terminology concerning race related issues is absent. In order to overcome this difficulty, I had to for instance create “new” words or use descriptions instead of particular terms. One example is the term race equality, which simply does not exist in the German context.
9.8 Suggestions for future research
This section provides suggestions for future research, which have emerged during the course of this study. This PhD study provides an account of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany, which is multilevel and relational and considers the larger historical context. However, further research is needed to empirically uncover the dynamics of organisational habitus.
To begin with, the findings of this study suggest that research needs to consider history as well as the treatment of history, since temporality is one of the key dimensions of habitus. Qualitative study is helpful for exploratory research in new areas. However, since this study draws only on thirty stakeholder interviews and a single company case study, further quantitative research could indicate the extent to which the research results can be generalised to other organisational settings. This applies particularly for the German context, where research, qualitative as well as quantitative, on the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity is nearly absent. For instance, more company case studies would give the
275 opportunity to explore the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity further. This should include the analysis of internal workforce statistics and employee surveys, which might help to reveal the multifaceted nature of power relationships and networks within the context of organisations.
At the macro-social level, future research on the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity would benefit from an analysis of wide range empirical data and policy documents concerned with the management of ethnic diversity, including concepts such as the notion of integration. Furthermore, empirical evidence is needed about race discrimination at work. The currently available data is lacking and does not provide sufficient information. Tackling race discrimination without knowing to what extent it is happening and where it happens is impossible. Furthermore, the investigation of national and international legislation concerned with race equality would offer both an understanding of current implementation and realisation of race equality legislation as well as predictions for future change.
At the micro-individual level, there is an urgent need for statistical studies, which explore the agency of diversity management stakeholders and managers. Such research is absolutely absent in Germany and should be deployed in order to collect data on diversity stakeholders and managers involvement in networks, their beliefs and opinions as well as their demographic profiles. In particular the latter point, which would account to the identity of diversity management stakeholders and managers is of huge importance, since the identity of diversity management stakeholders is ignored so far. Such research might shed light on existing power relations. These insights could be used to penetrate existing power relations and structures in order to enable change in the field of diversity management. Further research should examine the social, cultural, economic, and symbolic forms of capital held by ethnic minority workers, since there is a startling research gap regarding the capital of ethnic minorities in Germany. For instance Sayce (2006), examining gender and gender change within industrial relations, argues that Bourdieu's relational approach is a useful tool in analysing
276 how “women's differing access to capital can facilitate their positional progress within hierarchical gender-stratified industrial relations”. Utilising Bourdieu’s relational approach in order to explore the differing access of ethnic minorities to social capital could possibly offer a greater understanding of the boundaries faced by ethnic minorities.
Lastly, considering the vast knowledge gap in terms of managing ethnic diversity in Germany, this study focused on ethnicity as one strand of diversity management. However, future research should also examine intersections of diversity strands such as for instance ethnicity and gender (see Metcalfe 2006, 2010).
9.9 Concluding remarks
If wandering is the liberation from every given point in space, and thus the conceptional opposite to fixation at such a point, the sociological form of the "stranger" presents the unity, as it were, of these two characteristics. This phenomenon too, however, reveals that spatial relations are only the condition, on the one hand, and the symbol, on the other, of human relations. The stranger is thus being discussed here, not in the sense often touched upon in the past, as the wanderer who comes today and goes tomorrow, but rather as the person who comes today and stays tomorrow. He is, so to speak, the potential wanderer: although he has not moved on, he has not quite overcome the freedom of coming and going. He is fixed within a particular spatial group, or within a group whose boundaries are similar to spatial boundaries. But his position in this group is determined, essentially, by the fact that he has not belonged to it from the beginning, that he imports qualities into it, which do not and cannot stem from the group itself (Simmel 1971: 143).
277 This PhD study was set out to give an account to the understanding of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity. However, further than providing this understanding, the study also revealed the boundaries faced by ethnic minorities in the German society. Boundaries, which are created and maintained through symbolic violence, materialize in integration policies as well as in organisational diversity management approaches. In order to aid the inclusion of ethnic minority workers into the German labour market through managing diversity, it is more than crucial to break these boundaries. Bourdieu’s (1985, 1992, 1998, 2004) sociology has been helpful in uncovering the underlying hidden structures of the organisational habitus of managing ethnic diversity in Germany. However, there is a need for more critical research that uncovers the hidden meanings, assumptions and reasoning of dominant diversity management discourses.
278 Bibliography
Addy, D. N. (2003): Diskriminierung und Rassismus. Deutsches Institut für Menschenrechte, Berlin. Agocs, C. and Burr, C. (1996): Employment equity, affirmative action and managing diversity: assessing the differences. International Journal of Manpower, 17(4/5): 30-45. Albrecht, G. (1985): Video safaris: Entering the field with a camera. Qualitative Sociology, 8(4): 325–344. Alibhai-Brown, Y. (1999): The role of racism and predjudice in exclusion, marginalisation, inequality, and the implications for a cohesive society. International Council on Human Rights. Allatt, P. and Dixon, C. (2004): On using visual data across the research process: Sights and insights. In: Pole, C. (Ed.): Seeing is believing—approaches to visual research, Elseveir, London: 79–104. Alvesson, M. and Skoldberg, K. (2000): Reflexive Methodology: New Vistas for Qualitative Research, Sage, London. Ang, Ien. (2005): “Multiculturalism”. In: Bennett, T., Grossberg, L. and Morris, M. (eds.): New Keywords: A Revised Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Blackwell, Oxford. Ashkanasy, N.M., Hartel, C.E.J. and Daus, C.S. (2002): Diversity and emotion: the new frontiers in organisational behaviour research. Journal of Management, 28: 307-338. Astley, W. G. and Zammuto, R. F. (1992): Organisations science, managers and language games. Organisation Science, 3: 443-460. Atkinson, W. (2007): Anthony Giddens as adversary of class analysis. Sociology, 41(3), 533-549. Babka von Gostomski, C. (2010): Fortschritte der Integration. Zur Situation der fünf größten in Deutschland lebenden Ausländergruppen. Im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums des Innern. Forschungsbericht 8. Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge, Nürnberg. Baecker, D. (2005): Effektives Durcheinander – der gesellschaftliche Umgang mit Vielfalt, Vielfalt. Der Wert des Unterschiedes. Politische Ökologie, 91 (92): 11-14. Baecker, D. (2007): Why complex systems are also social and temporal. Paper submitted to European Conference on Complex Systems, Dresden, October 1- 5, 2007. University of Witten, Herdecke. Baer S. (2005): “Country report Germany” in Report on measures to combat discrimination, Network of Legal Experts in the non-discrimination field, EU Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/ fundamental_rights/pdf/legnet/derep05_en.pdf (14. 06. 2010). Bamford, D. and Gay, W. (2007): A case study into the management of racial diversity within an NHS teaching hospital. IJPSM 20 (4): 257-271. Banks, M. (1996): Ethnicity: anthropological constructions. Routledge, London. Banton, M. (1977): The Idea of Race. Tavistock, London.
279 Banton, M. (1983): Racial and Ethnic Competition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Barth, F. (ed.) (1969): Introduction. In: Ethnic groups and boundaries. Little, Brown, Boston: 9-38. Basch, L., Glick Schiller, N. and Szanton-Blanc, C. (1994): Nations unbound: Transnational projects, postcolonial predicaments, and deterritorialized nation-states. Gordon and Breach, New York. BBC News Europe (2010a): Merkel says German multicultural society has failed. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11559451 (12.12.2010). BBC News Europe (2010b): Germany's charged immigration debate. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11532699 (12.12.2010). Becker, A. (2006): Diversity Management aus der Perspektive der betriebswirtschaftlichen Theorie. In: Manfred Becker and Alina Seidel (eds): Diversity Management: Unternehmens- und Personalpolitik der Vielfalt. Schaeffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart: 205-238. Bednarz-Braun, I. (2004a): Zur Bedeutung von Migration und Geschlecht innerhalb der Frauen- und Geschlechterforschung. Vortrag anlässlich einer Fachtagung zum Thema „Migration, Geschlecht und die Bildung“ an der Katholischen Stiftungsfachhochschule München am 19.11.2004 in München. http://www.dji.de/bibs/224_Thesen_Vortrag_19.11.2003.pdf. (30.02.09). Bednarz-Braun, I. (2004b): Entwicklung von Theorieansätzen im Schnittpunkt von Ethnie, Migration und Geschlecht: In: Bednarz-Braun, I. and Heß- Meining, U. (eds.): Migration, Ethnie und Geschlecht. Theorieansätze, Forschungsstand, Forschungsperspektiven. München. Bell, M. P., Özbilgin, M. F., Beauregard, T. A. and Surgevil, O. (2011): Voice, silence and diversity in 21st century organisations: strategies for inclusion of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender employees. Human Resource Management, 50 (1): 131-146. Berard, T.J. (2005): Rethinking practices and structures. Philosophy of Social Science, 35 (96): 196-230. Berger, Peter L. and Luckmann, Thomas (1966): Die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit. Eine Theorie der Wissenssoziologie, Frankfurt a. M. Bericht der unabhängigen Kommission Zuwanderung (2001): Zuwanderung gestalten Integration fördern. Bundesministerium des Innern, Öffentlichkeitsarbeit, Berlin. Berlin-Institute für Bevölkerung und Entwicklung (Hrsg.) (2009): Ungenutzte Potenziale. Zur Lage der Integration in Deutschland. Berlin-Institute für Bevölkerung und Entwicklung, Berlin. Bhabha, H. (1995): "The Commitment to Theory." In: The Post-Colonial Studies Reader. Ed. Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin. Routledge, London: 206-209. Bhadury J., Mighty E.J. and Damar H. (2000): Maximising workforce diversity in project teams: a network flow approach. The International Journal of Management Science, 28: 143-153.
280 Bierema, L.L. and Thomas, K.M. (2008): Final refection: Resisting the resitors. In: Thomas, K.M. (Ed.) (2008): Diversity resistance in organisations. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Taylor and Francis Group, New York. Blau, F. and Beller, A. (1988). Trends in earnings differentials by gender, 1. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, ILR Review, ILR School, Cornell University, 41(4): 513-529. Blumberg, B., Cooper, D. and Schindler, P. (2005): Business research methods. McGraw-Hill Education, Berkshire. Böhmer, M. (2008): Press release No.: 211, by the federal government, 16. Juni 2008: http://www.bundesregierung.de/nn_56680/Content/DE/ Pressemitteilungen/BPA/2008/06/2008-06-12-ib-bildungsbeteiligung- integration.html. (16.06.2008). Bolman, L. and Deal, T. (2003): Reframing Organisations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, California. Bonnett, A. and Carrington, B. (2000): Fitting into Categories or Falling Between Them? Rethinking ethnic classification, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21 (4): 487-500. Boos-Nünning, U. (2003): Schul- und Berufssituation von Jugendlichen ausländischer Herkunft, insbesondere von Mädchen und Frauen. Friedrich- Ebert-Stiftung, Bonn. Available at: http://library.fes.de/fulltext/asfo/010 16002.html (10.1. 2008). Boos-Nünning, U. (2005): Zuhause in zwei Sprachen. In: Gogolin, I. et al. (2005): Interkulturelle Bildungsforschung. Migration und sprachliche Bildung. Waxman, Münster: 111-128. Borkert, M.; Bosswick, and Lülen-Klaßen, D. (2007): Local integration policies for migrants in Europe. European Forum for Migration Studies (efms), Bamberg. Bosch N. and Peucker M. (2005): Raxen annual report for Germany, EFMS, EUMC. Available at: http://web.uni- bamberg.de/~ba6ef3/pdf/DE_2005_NDCR.pdf (14. 06.2010). Bosch N., Peucker, M. and Reiter, S. (2007): Racism, xenophobia and ethnic discrimination in Germany 2007. European forum for migration studies (efms), Bamberg. Bourdieu, P. (1977): Outline of theory of practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Bourdieu, P. (1984): Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory, 7 (1): 14-25. Bourdieu, P. (1986) The forms of capital. In: John G. Richardson (ed.): Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Greenwood Press, New York: 241-258. Bourdieu, P. (1990): The Logic of Practice. Polity Press, Cambridge. Bourdieu, P. (1994): Language and symbolic power. Polity Press, Cambridge. Bourdieu, P. (1998): Practical reason: On the theory of action. Polity Press, Cambridge. Bourdieu, P. (2000): Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Routledge, London. Bourdieu, P. (2001): Masculine domination. Polity Press, Cambridge.
281 Bourdieu, P. (2002): Site effects. In: P. Bourdieu et al. (Eds), The Weight of the World. Polity Press, Cambridge. Bourdieu, P. (2003): Participant Observation, Journal of Royal Anthropological Institute, 9: 282-294. Bourdieu, P. (2004): Preface. In: Sayad, A.: The suffering of the immigrant. Polity Press, Cambridge: xi-xv. Bourdieu, P. and Boltanski, L. (1977): Changes in social structure and change in the demand for education. In: Giner, S. and Scotford-Archer, M. (eds.): Contemporary Europe: Social structure and cultural patterns. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London: 197-227. Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J. C. (1977): Reproduction in education, society and culture. Sage, Beverly Hills. Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L. (1992): An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, Polity Press, Cambridge. Boyer, P. (2009): Learning from each other. The integration of immigrant and minority groups in the United States and Europe. Centre for American Progress, Washington DC. Bradbury-Huang, H., Lichtenstein, B., Carroll, J. S., Senge and P. M. (2010): Relational Space and Learning Experiments: The Heart of Sustainability Collaborations. In: R., Pasmore, W. and Shani, A. B. (ed.): Research in Organisational Change and Development, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 18: 109-148. Bradbury, H. and Lichtenstein, B. M. B. (2000): Relationality in Organisational Research: Exploring The Space Between, Organisational Science, 11 (5): 551- 564. Bradbury, H., Lichtenstein, B., Carroll, J., Senge, P. and Powley, E. (2007): Relational space: Creating a context for innovation in collaborative consortia. University of Massachusetts. Brannen, J. (2002): The use of video in research dissemination: Children as experts on their own family lives. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 1(2), 173–180. Branscombe, N. and Doosje, B. (2004): International Perspectives on the Experience of Collective Guilt. In: Branscombe, N. and Doosje (ed.): Collective Guilt: International Perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 3–15. Brown, A., Fleetwood, S. and Roberts, J. (2001): “The marriage of critical realism and Marxism: happy, unhappy or on the rocks?”. In: Brown, A., Fleetwood, S. and Roberts, J. (eds.): Critical Realism and Marxism. Routledge, London. Brubaker, R. (1992): Civic and ethnic nations in France and Germany. In: Hutchinson John, Smith Anthony (ed.): Ethnicity. Oxford University press, Oxford – New York: 168-173. Bryman, A. (2004): Social Research Methods. Oxford University Press, New York. Bundesamt für politische Bildung (2008): Die soziale Situation in Deutschland. Available at: http://www.bpb.de/wissen/1R6EXS,0,0,Ausl%E4ndische_ Bev%F6lkerung_nach_L%E4ndern.html. (30.12.2008).
282 Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales (2001): Zur Situtation ausländischer Arbeitnehmer und ihrer Familienangehörigen. Repräsentativstudie 2001. Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales, Berlin. Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung (1984): Ausländer. Informationen zur politischen Bildung. Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, Bonn. Burns, L. R. (1993): Adoption and abandonment of matrix management programs: effects of organisational characteristics and interorganisational networks. Academy of Management Journal, 36 (1): 106-138. Buschkowsky, H. (2009): Migranteneltern verhindern integration ihrer Kinder. Available at: http://www.migazin.de/2009/10/21/migranteneltern- verhindern- integration-ihrer-kinder/ (10.11.2009). Butterwegge, C. (1996): Rechtsextremismus, Rassismus und Gewalt. Erklärungsmodelle in Diskussuion. Primus, Darmstadt. Calas, M.B., Smircich, L. (1999): Past postmodernism? Reflections and tentative directions. Academy of Management Journal, 24 (4): 649-71. Carpenter, M. (2010): The capabilities approach and critical social policy: Lessons from the majority world? Critical Social Policy, 29: 351-373. Carroll, G.R. and Hannan, M.T. (2000), “Why corporate demography matters: policy implications of organisational diversity”, California Management Review, 42: 148-163. Cassell, C. (2001): Managing diversity. Contemporary human resource management. In: T. ReDiversity management an & A. Wilkinson (Eds.): Harlow. Pearson Education: 404‐431. Cassell, C. and Biswas, R. (2000): Managing Diversity in the new millennium. Personnel Review, 29: 268-273. Cassell, C.M. (2005): Creating the role of the researcher: identity work in the management research process. Qualitative Research, 5 (2): 167-79. Castles, S. and Davidson, A. (2000): Citizens& and Migration: Globalisation and the politics of belonging. Macmillan, London. Castles, S. and Miller, M. (1998): The Age ofMigration: International population movements in the modern world (2nd edition). Macmillan, London. Chahrok, H., Klug, W. and Bilger, V. (2004): Migrants, minorities and legislation: Documenting legal measures and remedies against discrimination in 15 Member States of the European Union. EUMC, Luxembourg. Charmaz, K. (2006): Constructing Grounded Theory. Sage, London. Clayton, D. (2001): Antidiskriminierungsarbeit in Nordrhein-Westfalen: Ergebnisse der Evaluation der mit Landesmitteln geförderten Antidiskriminierungsprojekte. Landeszentrum für Zuwanderung NRW (LZZ), Solingen. Cohen, J. (1999): Trust, voluntary association and workable democracy: the contemporary American discourse of civil society. In: Mark E. Warren (ed.): Democracy and Trust. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 208-248. Coleman, J. (1990): Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge Mass, Belknap Press of Harvard University. Coleman, J. (1998): Social capital in the creation of human capital. In: Dasgupta, P. and Serageldin, I., (eds) (2000): Social Capital. A Multifaceted Perspective. The World Bank, Washington DC.
283 Coleman, J. S. (1988): Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94 Supplement: 95-120. Colley, H. and Hodkinson, P. (2001): Addressing social exclusion Problems with Bridging the Gap: the reversal of structure and agency. Critical Social Policy, 28(3): 307-338. Collier, A. (1994): Critical Realism: an Introduction to Roy Bhaskar’s Philosophy. Verso, London. Commission for Race Equality (1992): Ethnic monitoring in schools. CRE, London. Commission for Race Equality (2005): Ethnic monitoring in the public sector. Available at: http://83.137.212.42/sitearchive/cre/ gdpract/monitoring. html (10.10.2009). Constant, A., Gataullina, L. and Zimmermann, K. (2006): Ethnosizing immigrants. IZA Discussion Paper No. 2040. Cormack, J. and Bell, M. (2005): Developing anti-discrimination law in Europe – the 25 EU Member States compared. European Commission, Brussels. Cornelius, N., and Bassett-Jones, N. (2002): Final comments. Building workplace equality: Ethics, diversity and inclusion. N. Cornelius (Ed.), Thomson, Cornwall: 325‐333. Cornell, S. and D. Hartmann (1998): Ethnicity and Race: Making Identities in a Changing World. Pine Forge Press, California. Cox, T.H. and Blake, B. (1991): Managing cultural diversity: Implications for organisational competitiveness. Academy of Management Executive, 5(3): 45- 56. Craig, E. (1998): Ontology. In: Craig, E. (ed.): Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Volume 7, Nihilism – Quantum mechanics, interpretation of. Routledge, London. Crenshaw, K. (1989): Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex. A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. The University of Chicago Legal Forum, Chicago: 138-167. Crow, G. (2005): The Art of Sociological Argument. Palgrave, Basingstoke. Cunliffe, A. (2003): Reflexive inquiry in organisational research: questions and possibilities. Human Relations, 56 (8): 983-1003. Dass, P. and Parker, B. (1999): Strategies for managing human resource diversity: From resistance to learning. Academy of Management Executive, 13(2), 68‐80. Davis, O. I.; Nakayama, T.K. and Martin J.N. (2000): Current and future directions in ethnicity and methodology. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24 (5): 525-539. Decker, O., Weißmann, M., Kiess, J. and Brähler, E. (2010): Rechtsextreme Einstellungen in Deutschland 2010. Friedriech Ebert Stidftung, Forum Berlin. Denzin, N. K. (1978): The Research act. McGraw, Hill Book Company, New York. Der Spiegel (1973): Die Türken kommen - rette sich, wer kann. Available at: http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-41955159.html (10.10.2009). Destatis (2008): Personal öffentlicher Dienst. Available at: http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/ Internet/DE/
284 Content/Statistiken/FinanzenSteuern/OeffentlicherDienst/PesonalOeffent licherDienst/Aktuell,templateId=renderPrint.psml (12.10.2009). DGB Bundesvorstand (2006): Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz. Überblick über die Neuregelungen mit praktischen Erläuterungen. Berlin. DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. (1983): The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organisational Fields. In: Powell, W. and DiMaggio, P. (Eds.) (1991): The New Institutionalism in Organisational Analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Dix, A. (2001): Ethnic statistics and Data Protection: the German experience. In: Kriszan A. (Ed.): Ethnic monitoring and data protection: the European context. CEU Press – INDOK, Budapest. Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L. (Eds.) (1986): Prejudice, discrimination, and racism. Academic Press, New York. Durkheim, E. (1982): The Rules of the Sociological Method. Free Press, New York: 50-59. DW-world.de (2009): Deutsch-Türken würden SPD wählen. Available at: http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,4123133,00.html (30.03.09). Easterby-Smith, M. et al. (2002): Management research. 2nd ed. Sage, London. Easterby-Smith, M., Malina, D. (1999): Cross-cultural collaborative research: toward reflexivity. Academy of Management Journal, 42 (1): 76-86. Egan, M. and Bendick, Jr., M. (2003): Workforce Diversity Initiatives of US Multinational Corporations in Europe. Thunderbird International Business Review, 45: 701-727. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989): Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14 (4): 532-550. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1991): Better Stories and Better Constructs: The Case for Rigor and Comparative Logic. Academy of Management Review, 16 (3): 620-627. Eisenstadt, S. N. (1955): The absorption of immigrants. Free Press, Glencoe. Elger, K., Kneip, A. and Theile, M. (2009): Immigration: Survey Shows Alarming Lack of Integration in Germany. Spiegel Online, January 26, 2009. Available at: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,6035 88,00.htm. (02.06.2009) Elmerich, K. (2007): Personenbezogene Wahrnehmung des Diversity Management. Lang, Frankfurt am Main. Ely, R. J. and Thomas, D. A. (2001): Cultural Diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group process and outcomes. ADiversity management inistrative Science Quarterly, 2: 229-273. Emirbayer, M. and Mische, A. (1998): ‘What is agency’. American Journal of Sociology, 103(4): 962–1023. Emmison, M and Smith, P. (2000): Researching the Visual. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Englmann, B. and Müller, M. (2007): Brain waste. Die Anerkennung von ausländischen Qualifikationen in Deutschland. Tür an Tür- Integrationsprojekte gGmbH, Augsburg. Esping-Andersen, G. (2001): A welfare state for the 21st century. Report to the Portuguese presidency of the European Union. Available at: http://64.233.183.132/search?q=cache:tQYBhRjJcL8J:www.nnn.se/seminar/p
285 df/report.pdf+A+welfare+state+for+the+21st+century&hl=de&ct=clnk&cd=1 &client= firefox-a (12.10. 2009). Esser, H. (1980): Aspekte der Wanderungssoziologie: Assimilation und Integration von Wanderern, ethnischen Gruppen und Minderheiten, Darmstadt und Neuwied. Esser, H. (1998): Ist das Konzept der Integration gescheitert? Zur Bilanz der Migrationspolitik, Theorie und Praxis der Sozialen Arbeit, 4: 128 - 135. Esser, H. (1999): Soziologie. Spezielle Grundlagen. Band 1: Situationslogik und Handeln. Campus, Frankfurt. Esser, H. (2000): Soziologie. Spezielle Grundlagen. Band 5: Institutionen. Campus, Frankfurt. Esser, H. (2001): Kulturelle Pluralisierung und strukturelle Assimilation. Das Proble der ethnischen Schichtung. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 7 (2): 97-108. Esser, H. (2003): Ist das Konzept der Assimilation überholt? Geographische Revue, 5(Summer): 5-22. Esser, H. (2006): Migration, Language And Integration. AKI Research Review 4 Arbeitsstelle Interkulturelle Konflikte und gesellschaftliche Integration (AKI) Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB). Esser, H. (Hrsg.) (1983): Die fremden Mitbürger. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Integration von Ausländern, Düsseldorf. Eurobarometer (2009): Discrimination in the EU in 2009. Special Eorobarometer 317/ Wave 71.2. European Commission, TNS Opinion and Social. European Commission (2007a): Ethnic minorities in the labour market. An urgent call for better social inclusion. Report of the High Level Advisory Group of Experts on the social integration of ethnic minorities and their full participation in the labour market, Brussels. European Commission (2007b): The European Labour Market in the light of demographic change. Employment & Social Affairs. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/soc-prot/ageing/labour_market/ in tro_en.htm (11.08.09). European Commission (2008): Education and migration. Strategies for integrating migrant children in European schools and society. European Commision, Directorate-General for Education and Culture, Brussels. European Commission (2009): Discrimination in the EU in 2009. Special Eurobarometer 317. European Commission, Directorate General Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities. European Commission 2007: Ethnic Minorities in the Labour Market. An Urgent Call for Better Social Inclusion. Report of the High Level Advisory Group of Experts on the social integration of Ethnic Minorities and their Full Participation in the Labour Market. Brussels. European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) (2009): Country report on Germany. ECRI Secretariat, Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs, Council of Europe, Strasbourg. EuropeNews (2009): Germany: 50% think Muslims don't want to/can't integrate. Available at: http://europenews.dk/en/node/26864 (01.11.2009). Fairclough, N. (1998): Discourse and social change. Polity Press, Cambridge.
286 Fairclough, N. (2003): Political correctness: the politics of culture and language. Discourse and society, 14 (1): 17-28. Fairclough, N. (2005): Peripheral vision: Discourse analysis in organisation studies: The case for critical realism. Organisation Studies, 26 (6): 915-939. Favell, A. (2001): Integration policy and integration research in Europe: a review and critique. In: T. A. Aleinikoff and D. Klusmeyer: Citizenship Today. Global Perspectives and Practices. Brookings Institute/Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington DC. Federal chancellor (FC), (Bundeskanzlerin), Angela Merkel (2007): Diversity als Chance. Available at: http://www .bundesregierung.de /nn_1498/Content/DE/Rede/2007/12/2007-12-05-merkel-diversity-als- chance.html (04.03.09). Federal Law Gazette (2004): Residence Act. 1 (41) Chapter 3. Available at: http://www.proasyl.de/fileaDiversity management in/proasyl/fmredakt eure/Englisch/Residence_Act.pdf. (11.09.2009). Ferner, A., Almond, P. and Colling, T. (2005): Institutional theory and the crossnational transfer of employment policy: The case of ‘workforce diversity’ in US multinationals. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (3): 304– 321. Ferner, A., Almond, P., Clark, I., Colling, T., Edwards, T., Holden, L. and Muller- Camen, M. (2004): The dynamics of central control and subsidiary autonomy in the management of human resources: Case-study evidence from US MNCs in the UK. Organisation Studies 25 (3): 363–391. Fertig M. and Schmidt, C. M. (2001): First- and second-generation migrants in Germany – What do we know and what do people think. IZA, Bonn. Flick, U. (2007): Qualitative Sozialforschung. Eine Einführung. Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag, Hamburg. Flick, U. (1998): An introduction to qualitative research. Sage, London. Florkowski, G.W. (1996): Managing Diversity within Multinational Firms for Competitive Advantage. In: Kossek E.E. and Lobel, S.A. (Eds.): Managing Diversity. Human Resource Strategies for Transforming the Workplace. Blackwell Publishers Ltd., Massachusetts: 337–364. Flyvbjerg, B. (2006): Five misunderstandings about case-study Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12 (2): 219-245. Fosu, A. (1992): Occupational mobility of black women. The impact of post-1964 antidiscrimination measures. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, ILR Review, ILR School, Cornell University, 45(2): 281-294. Fotakis, C. (2000): Demographic ageing, employment growth and pensions sustainability in the EU. The option of migration. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations, New York. French, W. L. and Bell, C. H. (1999): Organisation development. Upper Saddle River. Prentice-hall, New York. Frohnen, A. (2005): Diversity in Action. Multinationalität in globalen Unternehmen am Beispiel Ford. Transcript, Bielefeld. Fulbrook , M. (2009): A History of Germany 1918-2000: The Divided Nation. Blackwell.
287 Fulbrook, M. (1989): From 'Volksgemeinschaft' to Divided Nation: German National Identities and Political Cultures since the Third Reich. Historical Research, 62 (148): 193-213. Fulbrook, M. (1989): From Volksgemeinschaft to divided nation: German national identities and political cultures since the Third Reich. Historical Research, 62 (148): 193-213. Fulbrook, M. (1991): Wir sind ein Volk? Reflections on German unification. Parliamentary Affairs, 44: 125-40. Fulbrook, M. (1999): German National Identity after the Holocaust. Polity Press, Cambridge. Fulbrook, M. (2007): Un-civilising processes? Excess and transgression in German culture and society: perspectives debating with Norbert Elias. German Monitor (66). Rodopi, Amsterdam. Futureorg (2009): TASD Studie: Türkische Akademiker und Studierende in Deutschland. Available at: http://tasd.futureorg.de/index.php?page =publikationen (11.10.2009). Galbraith, J. (1972): Organisations design: An information-processing view. In: Lorsch, J.W. and Lawrence, P.R. (Eds.), Enviroments and organisations: 177- 199. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Galbraith, J. (1973): Designing complex organisations. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. Game, A. (2008): Negative emotions in supervisory relationships: The role of relational modelsHuman Relations, 61 (3): 355-393. Gardenswartz, L. and Row, A. (1998): Managing Diversity – A Complete Desk Reference and Planning Guide. McGraw-Hill, New York. Geißler, R. and Pöttker, H. (Hrsg.) (2005): Massenmedien und die Integration ethnischer Minderheiten in Deutschland. Problemaufriss – Forschungsstand – Bibliographie. Tanscript, Bielefeld. Geißler, R., Pöttker, H. (Hrsg.) (2006): Massenmedien und die Integration ethnischer Minderheiten in Deutschland. Problemaufriss – Forschungsstand – Bibliographie, Bielefeld. Gestring, N., Janßen, A. and Polat, A. (2006): Prozesse der Integration und Ausgrenzung. Türkische Migranten der zweiten Generation. Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. Gilbert, J.A and Ivancevich, J.M. (2000), “Valuing diversity: a tale of two Academy of Management Executive, 14: 93–105. Glaser, B. G. (1998): Doing Grounded Theory - Issues and Discussions. Sociology Press. Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967): The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine, Chicago. Glastra, F. (1996): Intercultural management and the calculation of difference. Opleiding and Ontwikkeling, 9 (6): 13-20. Glastra, F. (1998): Organisations and diversity: Towards a contextual approach of intercultural management. Lemma, Utrecht. Glick Schiller, N., Basch, L. and Blanc-Szanton, C. (1992a): Towards a definition of transnationalism: Introductory remarks and research questions: In: Glick Schiller, N., Basch, L. and Blanc-Szanton, C. (eds.): Towards a transnational
288 perspective on migration. New York Academy of Sciences, New York: ix- xiv. Glick Schiller, N., Basch, L. and Blanc-Szanton, C. (1992b). Transnationalism: A new analytic framework for understanding migration. In: Glick Schiller, N., Basch, L. and Blanc-Szanton, C. (eds.): Towards a transnational perspective on migration. New York Academy of Sciences, New York: 1-24. Göktürk, D., Gramling, D. and Kaes, A. (2007): Germany in transit. Nation and migration 1995-2005. Berkeley: University of California Press. Goldberg, A., Mourinho, D. and Kulke, U. (1996): Labour market discrimination against foreign workers in Germany. International Migration Papers 7. Centre for Turkish Studies, Essen. Gomolla, M. and Radke, F. O. (2002): Institutionelle Diskriminierung. Die Herstellung ethnischer Differenz in der Schule. Opladen: Leske + Budrich. Gordon, Milton M. (1964): Assimilation in American Life. Oxford University Press, New York. Graham, D. (2010): Merkel says not enough immigrants on state payroll. Available at: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69T17V20101030 (11.12.2010). Granato, N. and Kalter, F. (2001): Die Persistenz ethnischer Ungleichheit auf dem deutschen Arbeitsmarkt. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 53(3): 497-520. Gray, D. and Griffin, C. (2009): Examining Britishness: The Construction of National and Citizen Identities through Citizenship Testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISPP 32nd Annual Scientific Meeting, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Jul 14, 2009. Green, S. (2007): Divergent Traditions, Converging Responses: Immigration and Integration Policy in the UK and Germany. German Politics, 16(1): 95-115. Grenfell, M. and James. D. (1998): Bourdieu and education. Acts of practical theory. Falmer Press, London. Grusky, D. B. and Szelényi, S. (2006): Inequality: Classic Readings in Race, Class, and Gender. Westview Press. Guarnizo, L.E. and Smith, M.P. (1998): The locations of transnationalism. In: Smith, M.P. and Guarnizo, L.E. (eds.): Transnationalism from below. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick: 3-34. Guba, E. and Lincoln, Y. (1994): Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. Denzin, K. and Lincoln, Y. (Eds.): Handbook of qualitative research. Sage, London: 105-117. Gümen, S. (2003): Frauen, Arbeitsmarkt und Einwanderungsgesellschaft – (k)ein Thema für die Frauenforschung? In : Castro Varela, M. and Clayton, D. (Hg.) (2003): Migration, Gender, Arbeitsmarkt. Neue Beiträge zu Frauen und Globalisierung. Ulrike Helmer Verlag, Königstein/Taunus: 30-58. Haas, A. and Damelang, A. (2007): Labour market entry of migrants in Germany – Does cultural diversity matter? HWWI Research Paper 3-10, Hamburg Institute of International Economics, Migration Research Group, Hamburg. Habermas, J. (1988): Concerning the public use of memory. New German Critique, 44: 40-50.
289 Hall, S. (1988): The toad in the garden. Thatcherism among the theorists. In: Nelson, C. and Grossberg, L. (eds.): Marxism and the interpretation of culture. Macmillan, London. Hall, W. A. and Callery, P. (2001): Pearls, Pith and Provocation: Enhancing the Rigor of Grounded Theory: Incorporating Reflexivity and Relationality. Qualitative Health Research, 11 (2): 257-272. Hallberg, L.R.-M. (2006): The “core category” of grounded theory: making constant comparisons. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, 1, 141–148. Hamel, J. (1993): Case study method, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills. Hansen, R. (2003): Migration to Europe Since 1945: Its History and Its Lessons. Political Quarterly, 74 (1): 25-38. Harker, R., Mahar, C. and Wilkes, C. (eds.): An Introduction to the Work of Haug, Sonja (2005): Zum Verlauf des Zweitspracherwerbs im Migrationskontext. Eine Analyse der Ausländer, Aussiedler und Zuwanderer im Sozio- Ökonomischen Panel. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 8 (2): 263-284. Healy, M. and Schwarz-Woelzl, M. (2007): Recruitment policies and practices in the context of demographic change. Centre for social innovation, Vienna. Hermes, G. and Rohrmann, E. (eds) (2006), “Nichts über uns – ohne uns!“ Disability Studies als neuer Ansatz emanzipatorischer und interdisziplinärer Forschung über Behinderung. AG SPAK, Neu-Ulm. Higgingotham, E. (1992): African-american woman´s history and the metalanguage of race. Journal of Woman and Culture in Society, 18 (2): 251- 274. Hirschman, A. O. (1970): Exit, voice, and loyalty. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Hoffmann-Nowotny, H. (1973): Soziologie des Fremdarbeiterproblems. Eine theoretische und empirische Analyse am Beispiel der Schweiz. Enke, Stuttgart. Hönekopp (IAB), Will, G. and Rühl, S. (2002): Migrants, minorities and employment in Germany: Exclusion, discrimination and anti-discrimination. RAXEN 3 Report to the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC). RAXEN focal point for Germany European Forum for Migration Studies (EFMS), Bamberg. Honig, B. (2001): Democracy and the foreigner. Princeton University Press, Princeton Hope Cheong, P., Edwards, R. and Goulbourn, H. (2007): Immigration, social cohesion and social capital: A critical review. Critical Social Policy, 27 (24): 24-49. House, R., Rousseau, D. and Thomas-Hunt, M. (1995): The meso paradigm: A framework for the integration of micro and macro organisational behavior. Research in Organisational Behavior, 17: 71-114. Hunter, L. (2004): Bourdieu an the social space of the PE Class: Reproduction of doxa through practice. Sport, Education and Society, 9: 175-192. Integration commissary Maria Böhmer (2007): Kampagne Vielfalt als Chance. Available at: http://www. Bundesregierung.de /nn_774/Content/DE/ Artikel/2007/ 08/2007-08-23-kampagne-vielfalt-als-chance.html (12.12.08).
290 International Crisis Group (2007): Islam and Identity in Germany. Crisis Group Europe Report, 181. Available at: http://www.flw.ugent.be/cie/ documenten/islam_in_germany.pdf (23.09.2009). International Organisation for Migration (2010): Regional and Country Figures,. Available at: http://www.iom.int/jahia/Jahia/about-migration/facts-and- figures/regional-and-country-figures (14. 06. 2010). Iyer, A., Leach, C. and Pedersen, A. (2004): Racial Wrongs and Restitutions: The Role of Guilt and Other Group-Based Emotions. In: Branscombe, N. and Doosje (ed.): Collective Guilt: International Perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 262–83. Janssens, M. and Zanoni, P. (2007): Minority employees engaging with (diversity) management: An analysis of control, agency, and micro- emancipation. Journal of Management Studies, 44 (8): 1371-1397. Jemielniak, D. and Kostera, M. (2010): Narratives of irony and failure in ethnographic work. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 27: 4. 335- 347. Jenkins, R. (1992): Pierre Bourdieu. Routledge, London/New York. Johnson, M. (2008): Making difference count: Ethnic monitoring in health (and social care). Available at: http://www.radstats.org.uk/no096/Johnson96.pdf (07.09.2009). Johnson, P. and Duberley, J. (2000): Understanding Management Research. Sage, London. Johnson, P. and Duberley, J. (2003): Reflexivity in management research. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (5): 1279-1303. Jones, D., Pringle, J. and Shepherd, D. (2000): Managing Diversity meets Aotearoa/New Zealand. Personnel Review, 29 (3): 364–380. Joppke, C. (1987): The cultural dimensions of class formation and class struggle: on the social theory of Pierre Bourdieu. Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 21: 53-78. Joppke, C. (2005):Selecting by Origin. Ethnic Migration in the Liberal State. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Kaas, L. and Manger, C. (2010): Ethnic Discrimination in Germany’s Labour Market: A Field Experiment. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), No. 4741. Kandola, R. and Fullerton, J. (1998): Diversity in Action - Managing the Mosaic. The Institute of Personnel and Development (IPD), London. Kearney, M. (1995): The local and the global: The Anthropology of Globalization and Transnationalism. Annual Review Anthropology, 24: 547-565. Kersten A. (2000): DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT , Dialogue, Dialects and Diversion. Journal of Organisational Change Management, 13: 235-248. Kim, K. M. (2004): Can Bourdieu’s critical theory liberate us from the symbolic violence? Cultural Studies – Critical Methodologies, 4: 362-376. King, D. (1988): Multiple jeopardy, multiple consciousnesses. The context of a black feminist ideology. SIGNS, Journal of Woman and Culture in Society, 14 (1): 42-72. Kirton, G., A. Greene (2006): The discourse of diversity in unionised contexts: views from trade union equality officers. Personnel Review, 35(4): 431-448.
291 Kirton, G., and Greene, A. (2005): The Dynamics of Managing Diversity. A Critical Approach. (2nd ed.). Elsevier Butterworth‐Heinemann, Oxford. Klein, K. J. and Kozlowski, S. W. J. (Eds.) (2000): Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organisations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions. Society for Industrial and Organisational Psychology Frontiers Series, Jossey- Bass, San Francisco. Klein, K., Tosi, H. and Cannella, A. (1999): Multilevel theory building: benefits, barriers, and new developments. Academy of Management Review, 24 (2): 243-248. Klein, P. (1998, 2005): Epistemology. In E. Craig (Ed.): Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge, London. Available at: http://www.rep.routledge. com/article/P059 (11.11.2008). Klinger, C. and Knapp, G. (2005): Achsen der Ungleichheit – Achsen der Differenz Verhältnisbestimmungen von Klasse, Geschlecht, »Rasse« / Ethnizität. Transit - Europäische Revue, Nr. 29/2005. Klink, A. and Wagner, U. (1999) Discrimination against ethnic minorities in Germany. Going back to the field. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29: 402-423. Knapp, G. (2001): Dezentriert und viel riskiert. Anmerkungen zur These vom Bedeutungsverlust der Kategorie Geschlecht. In: Axeli Knapp, G. and Wetterer, A. (eds): Soziale Verortung der Geschlechter. Gesellschaftstheorie und feministische Kritik, Westfälisches Dampfboot, Münster: 15-62. Knoth, A. (2006): Managing Diversity – Skizzen einer Kulturtheorie. Der andere Verlag, Tönning. Koall, I. (2001): Managing Gender & Diversity. Von der Homogenität zur Heterogenität der Organisation der Unternehmung. LIT, Hamburg. Koall, I. and Bruchhagen, V. (2002): Lust und Risiko in der Arbeit mit Verschiedenheit! Wissenschaftliche Weiterbildung Managing Gender & Diversity. Zeitschrift für Frauen- und Geschlechterforschung, 3 (22): 111-128. Koall, I., Bruchhagen, V. and Höher, F. (2002): Vielfalt statt Lei(d)tkultur - Managing Gender & Diversity in Theorie und Praxis. LIT, Münster. Kolb, H. (2005): The German Green Card. Policy Brief No. 3. Migration Research Group, HWWA, Hamburg. Kommission Zuwanderung (2001): Zuwanderung gestalten – Integration fördern. Unabhängige Kommission Zuwanderung, Berlin. Konecki, K. T. (2006): Reproduction of Organisational Culture – What Does Organisational Culture Recreate? Problems and Perspectives in Management, 4 (4): 26-41. Konrad, A. M., & Linnehan, F. (1995): Formalized HRM structures: Coordinating equal employment opportunity or concealing organisational practices? Academy of Management Journal, 38: 787-820. Köppel, P., Yan, J. and Lüdicke, J (2007): Cultural diversity management in Deutschland hinkt hinterher. Available at: www.bertelsmann- stiftung.de/cps/rde/xbcr/SID-0A000F14-5385B43A/bst/xcms_bst_Diversity management s_ 21374__2.pdf (01.08.2008). Kossek, B. (1997): Überschneidungen, Zwischenräume und Grenzziehungen. In: Schein, G.; Strasser, S.: Intersexions. Feministische Antropologie zu gescglecht, Kultur und Sexualität, Wien: 177-231.
292 Koydl, W. (1999): Warum das Kopftuch für uns Journalisten so attractive is. In: Türkisch deutscher Kulturbeirat (Hrsg.): Türkische Frauen in deutschen Medien, Ankara: 135-141. Kravitz, D.A. & Platania, J. (1993). Attitudes and beliefs about affirmative action: Effects of target and of respondent sex and ethnicity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 928-938. Krell, G. (1996): Mono- oder multikulturelle Organisationen. “Managing Diversity” auf dem Prüfstand. Industrielle Beziehungen, 3 (4): 334-350. Krell, G. (2003): Die Ordnung der “Humanressourcen” als Ordnung der Geschlechter, in Richard Weiskopf (eds), Menschenregierungskünste. Anwenundungen poststrukturalistischer Analyse auf Management und Organisation. Westdeutscher Verlag, Wiesbaden: 65-90. Krell, G. (ed) (2008): Chancengleichheit durch Personalpolitik. Gleichstellung von Frauen und Männern in Unternehmen und Verwaltungen. Rechtliche Regelungen - Problemanalysen – Lösungen. Gabler, Wiesbaden. Kristen, C. (2003): Ethnische Unterschiede im deutschen Schulsystem. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte. BUndesamt für politische Bildung, Bonn. Kymlycka, W. (1995): Multicultural citizenship. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Kyriakidou O. and Özbilgin M. (2006): Relational Perspectives in Organisation Studies: A Research Companion. Edward Elgar Publishers, Cheltenham and New York. Layder, D. (1993): New strategies in social research. Polity Press, Cambridge. Layder, D. (1998): Sociological Practice: Linking Theory and Social Research. Sage, London. Layton H. and Wilpert, C. (2003): Challenging Racism in Britain and Germany. Palgrave Macmillan, London and New York. Lenz, I. (1996): Grenzziehungen und Öffnungen: Zum Verhältnis von Geschlecht und Ethnizität in Zeiten der Globalisierung. In: Lenz, Ilse/Germer, Andrea (Hrsg.): Wechselnde Blicke. Frauenforschung internationaler Perspektive, Opladen: 200-228. Lerner, G. (2004): Social Construction of Gender, Class, Race, and Ethnicity. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences: 5984-5989. Leskien, D. (1997): Der Schutz vor rassistischer Diskriminierung im bundesdeutschen Recht. In: Friederich-Ebert-Stiftung, Büro Berlin, Fachtagung, 14./24. Juni 1997. Liebig, T. (2007): The labour market integration of immigrants in Germany, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 47, Paris. Liebman, L. (1992): Immigration status and American law: The several versions of antidiscrimination doctrine. In: Horowitz, D. L. and Noiriel, G. (eds.): Immigrants in Two Democracies: French and American Experience. New York University Press, New York: 368-90. Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. G. (1985), Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage, London. Linke, U. (1999): Blood and nation: the European aesthetics of race. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Linnehan, F. and Konrad, A. M. (1999): Diluting diversity: Implications for inter- group inequality in organisations. Journal of Management Inquiry, 8: 400-415.
293 Lipscomb, M. (2006): Rebutting the suggestion that Anthony Giddens´s structuration theory offers a useful framework for sociological nursing: a critique based upon Margeret Archer´s realist social theory. Nursing Philosophy, 7: 175-180. Loden, M. and Rosener, J. (1991): Workforce America! Managing Employee Diversity as a Vital Resource. Business One Irwin, Homewood, IL. Lorbiecki, A. and Jack, G. (2000): Critical turns in the evolution of diversity management. British Journal of Management, 11: 17-31. Luttrell, W. (2000): “Good enough” methods for ethnographic research. Harvard Educational Review, 70 (4): 499-523. M. and Prasad A. (eds.): Managing the Organisational Melting Pot: Dilemmas of Workforce Diversity. Sage, Thousand Oaks: 3-27. Mahar, C., Harker, R. and Wilkes, C. (1990): The Basic Theoretical Position. In: Harker, R., Mahar, C. and Wilkes, C. (eds.): An Introduction to the Work of Pierre Bourdieu: The Practice of Theory. Macmillan, London. Mandel, R. (2008): Cosmopolitan anxieties. Turkish challenges to citizenship and belonging in Germany. Duke University Press, Durham and London. Mannay, D. (2010): Making the familiar strange: can visual research methods render the familiar setting more perceptible? Qualitative Research, 10 (1): 91- 111. Martens, W. (2006): The Distinction within Organisations: Luhmann from a Cultural Perspective. Organisation, 13(1): 83-108. Mauthner, N. S. and Doucet, A. (2003): Reflexive Accounts and Accounts of Reflexivity in Qualitative Data Analysis, Sociology, 37 (3): 413-431. Mauws, M. K. and Phillips, N. (1995): Understanding language games. Organisation Science, 6: 322-334. May, T. (2001): Social research. Issues, methods and process. Open University Press, Buckingham and Philadelphia. Mayer, D. (2003): Non-Germans under the Third Reich. The Nazi Judicial and ADiversity management inistrative System in Germany and Occupied Eastern Europe, with Special Regard to Occupied Poland, 1939-1945. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Meier-Braun, K. (2002): Deutschland- Einwanderungsland. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main. Merx, A. and Vassilopoulou, J. (2007) Arbeitsrechtliches AGG und Diversity- Perspektiven. In: Koall, I., Bruchhagen, V. and Höher, F. (eds.): Diversity Outlooks - Managing Diversity zwischen Ethik, Business Case und Antidiskriminierung. LIT-Verlag, Münster, Hamburg. Metcalfe, B.D. (2006): Exploring cultural dimensions of gender and management in the Middle East. Thunderbird International Business Review, 48 (1): 93- 107. Metcalfe, B.D. (2010): Reflecting on difference: Women, Islamic feminisms and development in the Middle East. In:Özbilgin, M. and Sawad, J. (ed.): Diversity Management in Asia. Edward Elgar, Cheltenhem. Meyer, H. (2003) Gleichheit und Nichtdiskriminierung – die deutsche Debatte in Wolfrum, R. (Hrsg.) (2003) Gleichheit und Nichtdiskriminierung im nationalen und internationalen Menschenrechtschutz. Springer, Berlin.
294 Meyer, J. and Rowan, B. (1977): Institutionalized Organisations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. In: Powell, W., and DiMaggio, P. (Eds.) (1991): The New Institutionalism in Organisational Analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Miera, F. (2008): Labour Market Discrimination and Legal Challenges in Germany. EMILIE – A European Approach to Multicultural Citizenship: Legal Political and Educational Challenges, Funded by the European Commission, Sixth Framework Programme. Report on the national case Germany. European University Viadrina, Frankfurt/Oder. Miles, R. and Brown, M. (2004): Racism. Key ideas. Second edition. Routledge, New York. Mor Barak M.E. (2005): Managing Diversity: Toward a Globally Inclusive Workplace. Thousand Oaks, Sage, CA. Morawska, E. (1994): In defence of the assimilation model. Journal of American Ethnic History, 13 (2): 76-87. Morris, B. (1999): The Poverty of Constructivism: A Comparison of Philosophies of Inquiry in the Social Sciences. Available at: http://www.eric.ed.gov:80/PDFS/ED440903.pdf (21.3.2009). Morrison, A. M. (1992): The New Leader: Guidelines on Leadership Diversity. In Morrison, A.M. (1992): The New Leader: Guidelines on Leadership Diversity in organisations, Academy of Management Executive 14(1): 93-105. Morrison, E. W. and Milliken, F. J. (2000): Organisational Silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25: 706-725. Müller, D. (2005): Die Darstellung ethnischer Minderheite in deutschen Massenmedien. In: Geißler, R./Pöttker, H. (Hrsg.): Massenmedien und die Integration ethnischer Minderheiten in Deutschland. Problemaufriss – Forschungsstand – Bibliographie. Bielefeld: 83-126. Nadin, S. and Cassell, C. (2006): The use of a research diary as a tool for reflexive pratice. Some reflections from management research. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management Journal, 3 (3): 208-217. Nash, R. (2002): A realist framework for the sociology of education: thinking with Bourdieu. Educational philosophy and theory, 34 (3): 706-725. Nauck , B. (1988): Sozialstrukturelle und individualistische Migrationstheorien. Kdlner Zeitschrift fiir Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 40: 15-39. Nederveen Pieterse, J. (1995): Globalization as Hybridization. In: Featherstone, M., Lash, S. and Robertson, R. (ed.): Global Modernities. Sage, London: 45-68. Neergaard, H and Ulhøi, J. P. (2007): Handbook of qualitative research methods in entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar Publisher Limited, Cheltenham. Neumann, U. (2002): Die Darstellung von Migrantinnen und Migranten und ihre Themen in den audiovisuellen Medien. Merz Medien + Erziehung, 46. Jahrgang, Heft 5/02, München: 282-285. Neumann, W. (2006): Social Research Methods: Qualiativ and Quantitative Approaches (6th Ed). Allyn and Bacon Publishers, Boston. Neumeyer, M. (2009): Sarrazins und ehrliche Debatte. Available at: http://www.migazin.de/2009/10/21/sarrazins-und-ehrliche-debatte/ (21.10.2009).
295 Nishii, L.H., Özbilgin, M. (2008): Global DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT : towards a conceptual framework. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18 (11): 1883-1894. Nonneman, W. (2007): European immigration and the labour market. Migration Policy Insitute mpi, Bertelsmann Stifung. Available at: www.migrationinformation.org/transatlantic/ImmigrationEULaborMarket_72 507.pdf (25.01.2008). Oakes, L. S., Townley, B. and Cooper, D. J. (1998): Business Planning as Pedagogy: Language and Control in a Changing Institutional Field. ADiversity management inistrative Science Quarterly, 43 (2), Special Issue: Critical Perspectives on Organisational Control: 257-292. OECD (2007): International Migration Outlook 2007. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/document/25/0,3343,en_2649_33729_38797017_1_1_1_ 1,00.html (10.09.2008). Ofner, U. (2010): Symbolische exclusion als Erfahrung von BildungsausländerInnen mit akademischem Abschluss. In: Nohl, A. et al. (2010): Kulturelles Kapital in der Migration. VS Verlag, Wiesbaden: 224-234. Omanovic, V. (2006): Doing Critical Research: Implications for Studies on “Diversity in Organisations”. EURODIV PAPER 38.2006. Available at: www.feem.it/NR/Feem/resources/EurodivPapers/ED2006-038.pdf (01.03.2008) Ortlieb, R. and B. Sieben (2008): Diversity Strategies Focused on Employees with a Migration Background. An Empirical Investigation Based on Resource Dependence Theory. Management Revue, 19 (1+2): 70-93. Ortlieb, R. and Sieben, B. (2008): Diversity strategies focused on employees with a migration background. An empirical investigation based on resource dependence theory. Management Revue, 9, (1+2): 70-93. Otyakmaz, L. and Roach, T. (2008): Widerstand als Teil des Prozesses im Diversity-Management. Available at: http://www.migration- boell.de/web/diversity/48_1640.asp (21.1.2008). Özbilgin, M. (2002): The Way Forward for Equal Opportunities By Sex in Employment in Turkey and Britain. International Management, 7(1): 55–67. Özbilgin, M. and Tatli, A. (2005): Book review essay: Understanding Bourdieu´s contribution to organisation and management studies. Academy of Management Review, 30 (4): 855-877. Özbilgin, M. and Kyriakidou O. (Eds.) (2006): Relational Perspectives in Organisation Studies: A Research Companion. Edward Elgar Publishers, Cheltenham and New York. Özbilgin, M. and Tatli A. (2007): Opening up Opportunities through Private Sector Recruitment and Guidance Agencies. Working Paper Series No. 50 Equal Opportunities Commission, Manchester. Özbilgin, M. and Tatli, A. (2008): Global diversity management: an evidence based approach. Palgrave Macmillan, London and New York. Özbilgin, M. (2008): Global Diversity Management. In: Smith, P., Peterson, M. F. and Thomas, D. C. (eds): The Handbook of Cross-Cultural Management Research. Sage Press, London: 379-396. Özbilgin M. (ed.) (2009): Equality, Diversity and Inclusion at Work. Edward Elgar Press, London and New York.
296 Özbilgin, M. and Syed, J. (2010): Managing Gender Diversity in Asia: A Research Companion. Edward Elgar Press, Cheltenham and New York. Özbilgin, M. and Vassilopoulou, J. (2011): Relational Methods in Organisation Studies: a review of the field. In: Jemielniak, D. (ed.): Badania jakościowe. Podręcznik akademicki. Tom I: Podejścia, teorie, problemy, Warszawa: PWN. Parekh, B. (2000): The Future of Multi- Ethnic Britain. The Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain. Runnymede Trust/Profile Books, London. Park, R. (1928): Human Migration and the Marginal Man. American Journal of Sociology, 33: 881-893. Park, R. E. (1950): Race and Culture. The Free Press, New York. ParK, R. E. and Burgess, E. W. (1921): Introduction to the Science of Sociology. University of Chicago Press. Pautz, H. (2005): The politics of identity in Germany: the Leitkultur debate. Race Class, 46 (4): 39-52. Pécoud, Antoine(2003): Self-Employment and Immigrants Incorporation: The Case of Turks in Germany. Immigrants & Minorities, 22 (2): 247-261. Peucker M. (2006): Equality and anti-discrimination approaches in Germany. Working paper EFMS, Bamberg. Available at: http://web.uni- bamberg.de/~ba6ef3/mitmpe_e.htm (28.10.2009). Peucker, M. (2004): DGB fordert eine Kultur der Antidiskriminierung. Einblick (DGB) No 4/2004, p.5; expert hearing on the antidiscrimination bill in the parliamentary committee “Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Woman and Youth (March 2005), printed matter 15(12): 435. Available at: www.aus- portal.de/aktuell/gesetze/media/Anhoerung_070305_Verbaende(1).pdf (28.10.2009). Peucker, M. and Bosch, N. (2007): Combating ethnic discrimination and promoting equality in Germany: Trends and developments 2000 – 2005. European forum for migration studies (efms), Bamberg.
Pinn, I. (1997): Muslimische Migranten und Migrantinnen in deutschen Medien. In: Cleve, G. (Hrsg.): Wissenschaft – Macht – Politik: Sigfried Jäger zum 60. Geburtstag. Westfälisches Dampfboot, Münster: 215-234. Portes, A. (1978): Migration and Underdevelopment. Politics and Society, 8: 1- 48. Portes, A., Guarnizo, L. and Landolt, P., (1999): The study of transnationalism: Pitfalls and promise of an emergent research field. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22: 217– 237. Prasad, P. and Mills, A.J. (1997): From showcase to shadow: understanding the dilemmas of managing workplace diversity. In: Prasad, P., Mills, A.J., Elmes, M. and Prasad A. (eds.): Managing the Organisational Melting Pot: Dilemmas of Workforce Diversity. Sage, Thousand Oaks: 3-27. Prasad, P. and Pringle, J.K. (2006): Handbook of Workplace Diversity. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi. Punch, K. (1988): Introduction to Social Research. Sage, London. Punch, K. (1998): Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Sage, London. Putnam R. (2007): E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty- first Century. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30 (2): 137–174.
297 Putnam, R. (1993): The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life. The American Prospect, 13. Available at: http://epn.org/prospect /13/13putn.html (10.10.2008). Putnam, R. (1995): Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital. Journal of Democracy, 6 (1): 65–78. Putnam, R. (2000): Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon & Schuster, New York. Ragin, C. C. and Becker, H. S. (1992): What Is a Case?: Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Reissmann, O. (2010): Right-Wing Attitudes On the Rise in Germany. Spiegel Online International. Available at: http://www.spiegel.de/international /germany/0,1518,722868,00.html (10.12.2010). Rensmann, L. (2004): Collective Guilt, National Identity and Political Processes in Comtemporary Germany.In: Branscombe, N. and Doosje (ed.): Collective Guilt: International Perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 169–90. Rex, J. (2000): The Integration of Immigrants and Refugees in European Societies. In: Appelt, E. and Jarosch, M. (eds): Combating Racial Discrimination: Affirmative Action as a Model for Europe. Berg, Oxford. Richardson, L. (2003): A Method of Inquiry. In: Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.): Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials. Thousand Oaks, Sage, California: 499–541. Richardson, S. and L. Lester (2004): A Comparison of Australian and Canadian Immigration Policies and Labor Market Outcomes. Report to the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. The National Institute of Labor Studies, Flinders University. Richter, M. (2004): Gekommen und geblieben. Edition Körber Stiftung, Hamburg. Risman, B. (2004): Gender as a Social Structure: Theory Wrestling with Activism. Gender & Society, 18: 429-451. Roberts, K. (1996): Managing disability-based diversity. In: Kossek, E. and Lobel, S. (eds.): Managing diversity: Human resource strategies for transforming the workplace diversity. Blackwell. Rosenthal, G. (1998): Der Holocaust im Leben von drei Generationen. Familiale Folgen von Überlebenden der Shoa und von Nazi-Tätern. Psychosozial Verlag, Gießen. Rosenzweig, P. (1998): Managing the New Global Workforce: Fostering Diversity, Forging Consistency. European Management Journal, 16(6): 644- 652. Rühl, S. and Will, G. (2004): Analytical report on legislation RAXEN National focal point Germany. Europäisches Forum für Migrationsstudien / European Forum for Migration Studies (EFMS), Bamberg. Ruhrman, G. and Nieland, J.U. (2001): Medien – Migration – Integration. In: Die Ausländerbeauftragte der Freien und Hansastadt Hamburg und die Hamburgische Anstalt für neue Medien (Hrsg.). Elektronische Massenmedien und die Grenzen der kulturellen Identität. Berlin, Vistas.
298 Ruhrmann, G. and Sommer, D. (2005): Migranten in den Medien – von der Ignoranz zum Kontakt. Zeitschrift für Ausländerrecht und Ausländerpolitik (ZAR), Baden-Baden, 25 (3/4): 123-127. Safran, W. (2000): Germans and Jews since 1945. The politics of absolution, amends, and ambivalence. In: Del Caro, A. and Ward, J. (Eds.): German studies in the post Holocaust age: The politics of memory, identity, and ethnicity Boulder CO, University Press of Colorado: 41-51. Sarrazin, T. (2009). Klasse statt Masse. Lettre International, 86: 197-202. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2007): Research Methods for Business Students. Prentice Hall, London. Sayad, A. (2004): The suffering of the immigrant. Polity Press, Cambridge. Sayce, S. (2006): Gender change? Locked into industrial relations and Bourdieu. Employee Relations, 28 (5): 468 – 482. Sayer, A. (2000), Realism and Social Science. Sage, London. Scheuer, S. (2001): The social dimension of rational choice- a critical and realist view of theories of motivation and agency at work. Paper presented at the 5th Conference of the International Association for Critical Realism at Roskilde University, Denmark, 17-19 August 2001. Schneider, S.C. and Barsoux, J. (2003): Managing Across Cultures. Harlow, UK: Financial Times and Prentice Hall. Schrader, N. and Griese, H. (1976): Die zweite Generation: Sozialisation und Akkulturation ausländischer Kinder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Kronberg, Äthenäum. Schrettenbrunner, H. (1982): Gastarbeiter: ein europäisches Problem. 1. Auflage der Neufassung. Diesterweg, Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, München. Schwan, G. (1997): Politics and guilt: the destructive power of silence. Fischer, Frankfurt. Schwarz-Wölzl, M. and Maad, C. (2005): Der Vielfalt eine Chance geben. Wegweiser für Managing Diversity im Betrieb. Available at: www.managing- diversity.at/opencms/opencms/md/de/topNav/Down lo- ad.html (28.01.2007) Schwarz-Wölzl, M. and Maad, C. (2004): Diversity und Managing Diversity. Teil 2: Fallbeispiele und Good Practice. Available at: http://www. managing- diversity.at /opencms /ex port/download/MDAllgemein/ Diversity _teil2_Fall beispiele.pdf (28.01.2007). Schwarz-Wölzl, M. and Maad, C. (2005): Der Vielfalt eine Chance geben. Wegweiser für Managing Diversity im Betrieb. Available at: www.managing- diversity.at/opencms/opencms/md/de/topNav/Down load.html (28.01.2007). Schwarzer, A. (2010): Die große Verschleierung. Für Integration, gegen Islamismus. Kiepenheuer und Witsch Verlag, Köln. Scott, W. R. (1992): Organisation: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. Englewood Cliffs. Prentice Hall, Inc., New Jersey. Seidl, D. and Becker, K. H. (2006): Organisations as Distinction Generating and Processing Systems : Niklas Luhmanns Contribution to Organisation Studies. Organisation, 13 (1): 9-35. Senol, E. (2009): Der Teufel an der Wand hat einen türkischen Migrationshintergrund. Available at: http://www.migazin.de/2009/04 /20/der- teufel-an-der-wand-hat-einen-turkischen-migrationshintergrund/ (20.04.2009).
299 Silvermann, D. (Ed.) (1993): Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice. Sage , London. Simmel, G. (1950): The Sociology of Georg Simmel. Compiled and translated by Kurt Wolff. Free Press, Glencoe, IL. Simmel, G. (1971): The stranger. In Individuality and Social Forms. Univ. Chicago Press. Chicago: 143–50. Simon, P. (2007): Ethnic statistics and data protection in the Council of Europe countries. Study Report. Institut National d’Etudes Demographiques, Strassbourg. Skrobanek, J. (2007): Determinants of occupational and social integration and of ethnic self-exclusion among young immigrants: 1st Report. Deutsches Jugendinstitut (DJI), Halle. Smircich, L (1983): Concepts of Culture and Organisational Analysis. ADiversity management inistrative Science Quarterly, Organisational Culture, 28 (3): 339-358. Smith, M. and Emmison, P. (2000): Researching the Visual: Images, Objects, Contexts and Interactions in Social and Cultural Inquiry. Sage, London. Soni, V. (2000): A twenty-first century reception for diversity in the public sector: a case study. Public ADiversity management inistration Review, 60: 395-408. Spetsmann-Kunkel, M. (2007): “Mekka Deutschland”. Islamophobie als Effekt der Spiegel-Berichterstattung. Eine Diskursfragmentanalyse. Available at: www.stoppt-die-hetze.de/sdh-mekka-deutschland.pdf (23.10.2007). Spiegel Online (2009): We Cannot Afford to Let an Underclass Continue to Grow. Available at: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518, 655106,00.html (16.10.2009). Spiegel Online (2010): The World From Berlin: 'Sarrazin Has Crossed a Red Line With His Racist Nonsense. Available at: http://www.spiegel.de/international /germany/0,1518,714555,00.html (11.12.2010). Stadler, P. (1999): Multikulturelle Schule und monokulturelle Lehrerschaft: ethnozentrische Selektion statt pluralistische Öffnung. Beiträge zur Leherbildung, 17, (3): 285-296. Stake, R. E. (1995): The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage. Stalker, P. (2002): Migration Trends and Migration Policy in Europe. International Migration, Vol. 40. Statistisches Bundesamt (2004) Datenreport 2003. Statistisches Bundesamt, Bonn. Statistisches Bundesamt (2005): Bevölkerung mit Migrationshintergrund - Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus 2005. Fachserie 1, Reihe 2.2. Statistisches Bundesamt, Wiesbaden. Statistisches Bundesamt (2007): Datenreport 2006. Statistisches Budnesamt, Bonn. Steinhardt, M. (2006): Arbeitsmarkt und Migration – eine empirische Analyse der Lohn- und Beschäftigungseffekte von Zuwanderung für Deutschland. HWWI Research Paper 3-4, Hamburg Institute of International Economics, Migration Research Group, Hamburg. Stern, F. (1994): The revival of anti-Semitism in united Germany. Historical aspects and methodological considerations. In: Brown, M. (Ed.): Approaches to anti-Semitism: Context and curriculum. The American Jewish Committee, New York: 78-94.
300 Süß, S. (2007): Die institutionalisierung personalwirtschaftlicher Managementkonzepte. Eine strukturationstheoretisch-politische Perspektive, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the section Human Resource Management of the German Academic Association for Business Research, September 20-21, Universität Duisburg-Essen. Süß, S. and Kleiner, M. (2008): Dissemination of DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT in Germany: A new institutionalist approach European Management Journal, 26 (1): 35-47. Swartz, D. (1997): Culture and power. The sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Syed, J. (2008): Employment prospects for skilled migrants: A relational perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 18 (1): 28-45. Syed, J. and Özbilgin, M. (2009): A Relational Framework for International Transfer of Diversity Management Practices. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20 (12): 2435-2453. Taifel, H. and Turner, J. (1986): The social identity theory of intergroup conflict. In: Worchel, S. and Austin, W. (Eds.): Psychology of intergroup relations. Nelson-Hall, Chicago: 7-24. Tatli, A. and Ozbilgin, M. (2009a): Foresight and Agency in Management of Change. In: Costanzo, L.A. and Mackay, B. (eds.): Handbook of Research in Strategy and Foresight. Edward Elgar Press, Cheltenham and New York. Tatli, A. and Ozbilgin, M. (2009b): Understanding Diversity Manager's Role in Organisational Change: towards a research framework. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 26: 244-258. Taylor, C. (1992): Multiculturalism and “The Politics of Recognition”. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Tellis, W. (1997): Application of a Case Study Methodology. The Qualitative Report, 3 (3). The Economist (2007): Minorities in Germany: The Integration Dilemma. Available at http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory (31.11.2007). Thomas Jr., R. R. (1995): A Diversity Framework. In: Martin M. Chemers. et at. Diversity in Organisations, Sage, London. Thomas, D. A. and Ely, R.J. (1996): Making differences matter: A new paradigm for managing diversity. Harvard Business Review, 74 (5): 79–90. Thomas, K. M. (Ed.) (2008): Diversity resistance in organisations. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Taylor and Francis Group, New York. Thomas, K. M. and Plaut, V. C. (2008): The many faces of diversity resistance in the workplace. In: Thomas, K.M. (Ed.) (2008): Diversity resistance in organisations. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Taylor and Francis Group, New York: 1-23. Thomas, R. (1990): From affirmative action to affirming diversity. Harvard Business Review, 68 (2): 107-117. Thomas, R.R. (1990): From affirmative action to affirming diversity. Harvard Business Review, 68(2): 107-117. Thomas, W. I. and Znaniecki, F. (1927): The Polish Peasant in Europe and America. 2 Vols. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
301 Tomervik, K. (1995): Workforce diversity in Fortune 500 corporations headquartered in Minnesota: Concepts and practices. Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD) Conference Proceedings, St. Louis, MO. Tsogas, G. and Subeliani, D. (2005): Managing in the Netherlands: A case study of Rabobank. International Journal of Human Resource, 16 (5): 831-851. United Nations (2010): Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related forms of intolerance, follow-up and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. Report of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, Githu Muigai. Human Rights Council. Available at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/14session/A.HRC.14.43 .Add.2_en.pdf (30.09.2010). Van Dyk, T.A. (1995): Elite discourse and the reproduction of racism. In R. K. Slayden & D. Slayden (Eds.) Hate Speech. Sage, Newbury Park: 1-27. Van Dyk, T. A. (1996): Power and the news media. In: Paletz, D. L.; Vinson, C. D. (eds.): Political communication in action. Hampton Press, Cresskill: 9-36. Van Dyk, T.A. (2007): Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies, 11 (2): 115-140. Vasta, E. (2006): From Ethnic Minorities to Ethnic Majority Policy: changing identities and the shift to assimilationism in the Netherlands. Centre on Migration, Policy and Society Working Paper No. 26, University of Oxford. Vedder, G. (2006): Die historische Entwicklung von Managing Diversity in den USA und in Deutschland. In: Krell, G. and Wächter, H. (eds): Diversity Management. Impulse aus der Personalforschung. München and Mering: Hampp: 1-23. Venema, M. and Grimm, K. (2002): Situation der ausländischen Arbeitnehmer und ihrer Familienangehörigen in der BRD. Repräsentativuntersuchung 2001 Teil A Tabellenband. Forschungsbericht des Bundesministeriums für Arbeit und Sozialordnung, Offenbach/München. Vertovec, S. :(1999) Conceiving and researching transnationalism. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 22 (2): 447-462. Vertovec, S. (2001): Transnationalism and identity. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 27 (4): 573-582. Walzer, M. (1983): Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. Basic Books, New York. Watson W.E., Kumar K. and Michaelsen L.K. (1993): Cultural diversity's impact on interaction process and performance: comparing homogenous and diverse task groups. Academy of Management Journal, 36: 590-602. Watson, R. (1995): Symbolic interactionism. In: Verschueren, J, Östman, J. O., Blommaert, J. and Bulcaen, C.: Handbook of Pragmatics, John Benjamins Publishing Company. Weber-Menges, S. (2005): Die Wirkungen der Präsentationen ethnischer Minderheiten in deutschen Medien, s. 127-184. In: Geißler, R./Pöttker, H. (Hrsg.): Massenmedien und die Integration ethnischer Minderheiten in Deutschland. Problemaufriss – Forschungsstand – Bibliographie. Bielefeld. Weber, M. (1978): Economy and Society. Volumes 1-2. University of. California Press, Berkeley.
302 Weiß, A. (2001): Rassismus als symbolisch vermittelte Dimension sozialer Ungleicheit. In: Weiß, A. at al (Hrsg): Die symbolische Dimension sozialer Ungleicheit. Darmstadt: 79-108. Welt Online (2009): Warum Türken bei der Integration nicht mitspielen. Available at: http://www.welt.de/politik/article3088721/Warum-Tuerken-bei- der-Integration-nicht-mitspielen.html (25.2.2009). Wentling, R. and Palma-Rivas N. (2000): Current status of diversity initiatives in selected multinational corporations. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11 (1): 35-60. Wentling, R.M. and Palma-Rivas, N. (1997): Diversity in the Workforce: A Literature Review. National Center for Research in Vocational Education. Werbner, P. and Modood, T. (1997): Debating Cultural Hybridity - Multi-Cultural Identities and the Politics of Anti-Racism. Zed Books, London and New Jersey. Wetherell, M. and Potter, J. (1992): Mapping the Language of Racism: Discourse and the Legitimation of Exploitation. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Wholey, D. and Burns, L.R. (1993): Organisational transitions: From changes by health maintenance organisations. In: Bacharach (Ed.), Research in the sociology of organisations, JAI Press, Greenwich. Will, Rühl (2004): Analytical report on legislation RAXEN National focal point Germany. Europäisches Forum für Migrationsstudien / European Forum for Migration Studies (EFMS), Bamberg. Wrench, J. (2001): Diversity management in the European context: a critical examination of organisational strategies for combating ethnic discrimination and exclusion. International Perspectives on Cross-Cultural Workforce Diversity: The Inclusive Workplace, Bellagio, Italy. Wrench, J. (2002): Diversity management in different EU countries. The new way of combating ethnic discrimination. Danish centre for migration and ethnic studies. Wrench, J. (2003). Managing Diversity, fighting racism or combating discrimination? A critical exploration. Council of Europe and European Commission Research Seminar Resituating Culture – Reflections on Diversity, Racism, Gender and Identity in the Context of Youth, Budapest . Wrench, J. (2005): Diversity management can be bad for you. Race & Class, 46(3): 73-84. Yin, R. (1984): Case study research: Design and methods (1st ed.). Thousand Oaks, Sage, Beverly Hills. Yin, R. K. (1981): The Case Study as a Serious Research Strategy. Knowledge, (3): 97-114. Yin, R. K. (1994): Case study research: Design and methods, 2nd edn, Thousand Oaks, Sage, CA. Yin, R. K. (2002): Case Study Research, Design and Methods, 3rd ed. Newbury Park, Sage, CA. Yurdakul, G. (2009): From Guest Workers into Muslims: The Transformation of Turkish Immigrant Associations in Germany. Cambridge Scholars Press, Newcastle.
303 Zamponi R. and Jessat, P. (2010): Beschwerden über mangelnde Schulkenntnisse – Handwerk fehlt qualifizierter Nachwuchs. Hamburger Abendblatt. Available at: http://www.abendblatt.de/wirtschaft/article1399491/Handwerk-fehlt- qualifizierter-Nachwuchs.html (01.08.2010). Zick, A. (1997): Vorurteile und Rassismus: Eine sozialpsychologische Analyse. In: Wagner, U. (ed.): Texte zur Sozialpsychologie. Vol. 1. Waxmann, Frankfurt am Main.
304 Appendices
Appendix I: Original interview guide for interviews with stakeholder
Explanation:
This interview is conducted as a part of my research project, which I am doing for my PhD at the Norwich Business School (NBS) at the University of East Anglia in the UK. The aim of this research is to understand the German model of diversity management, in particular in relation to the dimension ethnicity/race. The activation and integration of unused European working population potential, as for example the German migrant and ethnic minority population, is seen as one possibility to cope with current and increasing labour shortages due to demographic changes. Furthermore, discrimination can be seen as an antagonistic dilemma. How the activation and integration of this unused working population potential with diversity management could be achieved is one of my major research questions. I will ask you questions about the state of diversity Management in Germany and your own experiences in the diversity management field. No individual names will be revealed and they will be kept strictly confidential.
German explanation: Dieses Interview wird im Rahmen meiner Doktorarbeit, welche ich an der Norwich Business School (NBS), Universität East Anglia schreibe, erhoben. Das Ziel dieser Untersuchung ist das deutsche Diversity Management Modell zu verstehen und zu beschreiben, insbesondere in der Beziehung zu Migranten und Menschen mit Migrationshintergund. Die Aktivieung und Integration von brachliegendem und ungenutzen europäischen Arbeitskraftpotenzial, wie zum Beispiel von Migranten und Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund, wird als eine Möglichkeit gesehen dem derzeitigen und kommenden Arbeitskräftebedarf entgegen zu wirken. Diskriminierung kann dabei als ein entgegenwirkender Faktor verstanden werden. Wie dieses ungenutzte Arbeitskräftepotenzial mit Diversity Management aktiviert und integriert werden kann ist eine meiner Hauptfragestellungen. Ich werde Ihnen dafür Fragen stellen, erstens zum derzeitigen Status von Diversity Management in Deutschland und zu Ihren eigenen Erfahrungen im Diversity Management Feld. Alle Namen werden dabei anonymisiert und verbleiben vertraulich.
Underlying research question: What is the German model of managing diversity? (macro level)
1. Diversity management in Germany, how would you describe that? Probe: What do you think is the current state of diversity management in Germany?
305 Probe: How is the debate? Probe: Have you experienced different methods of diversity management? German: Diversity Management in Deutschland, wie würden Sie dies beschreiben? Prüffrage: Was denken Sie ist der derzeitige Stand von Diversity Management in Deutschland? Prüffrage: Wie ist der Debatte? Prüffrage: Welche verschiedene Ansätze und Methoden können Sie beschreiben?
Underlying research question: What are the national drivers, barriers and forces of resistance against the management of racial diversity? (Macro- level)
2. What drives the German diversity management topic and the practice? Probe: Which of them are influencing your own work? German: Was sind die Hauptantriebskräfte für Diveristy in Deutschland? Prüffrage: Welche davon beeinflussen Ihre eigene Arbeit und wie?
3. Are there barriers and forces of resistance against the management of diversity? Probe: Which can you describe? Probe: Which can you describe for on the national level? Probe: Which can you describe for the organisational level? Probe: Which can you describe for your own organisation? Probe: Which barriers can you name for your own work? Probe: How are those influencing your work? German: Gibt es Barrieren und Widerstände gegen Managing Divesity? Prüffrage: Welche können Sie beschreiben? Prüffrage: Welche können sie auf der nationalen Ebene beschreiben? Prüffrage: Welche können Sie Auf der organisationalen Ebene beschreiben? Prüffrage: Welchen Barrieren sind Sie in Ihrer eigenen Arbeit ausgesetzt? Prüffrage: Wie beeinflussen diese Ihre Arbeit?
Underlying research question: How are decision and opinion leaders influencing managing diversity in Germany, which power do they have? (Micro level)
4. In your opinion who are the main people and institutions in the German diversity management field? Probe: Are there drivers that promote diversity management?
306 Probe: Are they influencing the diversity management field, if yes how? Probe: Are they influencing your own work, if yes how? Probe: Are those related to each other? How? Probe: How are you related to them? German: Welche Personen und Institutionen sind Ihrer Meinung nach die Hauptakteure im deutschen Diversity Management ? Prüffrage: Gibt es Personen und Institutionen die Diversity Management fördern und voranbringen? Prüffrage: Beinflussen diese das Feld? Wenn ja, wie? Prüffrage: Beeinflussen diese Ihre eigene Arbeit? Wenn ja, wie? Prüffrage: Sind diese miteinander verbunden? Wenn ja, wie? Prüffrage: Wie sind Sie mit diesen verbunden?
5. Who are the main decision makers and opinion leaders in the German diversity management field? Probe: Are they influencing the diversity management field, if yes how? Probe: Are they influencing your own work, if yes how? Probe: What power do they have? German: Wer sind die Entscheidungsträger und Meinungsbilder/-führer im deutschen Diversity Management Feld? Prüffrage: Beinflussen diese das Feld? Wenn ja, wie? Prüffrage: Beeinflussen diese Ihre eigene Arbeit? Wenn ja, wie? Prüffrage: Welche Macht/Einfluss haben diese?
6. Are their any other factors influencing your work? If yes, please describe them. German: Welche weiteren Faktoren beeinflussen Ihre Arbeit?
Underlying research question: What are German organisations doing for the inclusion of minorities and against discrimination for the reasons of ethnicity/race, when they are managing diversity? (Meso- level)
7. What are the attributes of a successful diversity management? German: Was sind die Merkmale eines erfolgreichen Diversity managements?
8. Can you please tell me something about inclusion and exclusion of minority ethnic workers? German: Können Sie mir bitte etwas über die Inklusion und Exklusion von Arbeitskräften mit Migrationshintergrund erzählen?
9. Can you please tell me something about diversity management and the inclusion of ethic minority workers?
307 Probe: Are they operating together? How? German: Können Sie mir bitte etwas über Diversity Mangement und die Inklusion von Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund erzählen? Prüffrage: Arbeiten diese zusammen? Wie?
10. Are German organisations trying to include minority ethnic individuals? Probe: How? Probe: Which methods do you know? German: Versuchen deutsche Organisationen/Unternehmen Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund zu includieren/integrieren? Prüffrage: Wie? Prüffrage: Welche Methoden/Konzepte kennen Sie?
11. Do you think there is a need for special methods to include minorities in the labour market? Probe: Do you know any other methods? Probe: Which methods could be applied? German: Denken Sie das es, für die Inclusion von Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund in den Arbeitsmarkt, Bedarf für besondere Maßnahmen gibt? Prüffrage: Kennen Sie irgendwelche anderen Maßnahmen? Prüffrage: Welche Methoden könnten man anwenden?
12. Why do you think are ethnic minority workers still underrepresented in the labour market and not integrated? German: Was denken Sie ist der Grund dafür, das Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund immer noch unterrepräsentiert sind auf dem Arbeitsmarkt?
13. How do you think organisations are legitimating the exclusion of for example ethnic minorities? Probe: Deficit or potential, what do you think do organisations see in ethnic minority workers? German: Was glauben Sie, wie Organisationen die Exklusion von Migranten/Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund legitimieren? Prüffrage: Defizit oder Potenzial, was glauben Sie sehen Unternehmen in Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund?
14. What is the connection between education and inclusion/exclusion of ethnic minorities in the workplace? Probe: Does higher education leads to higher integration in the labour market? German: Wie würden Sie den Zusammenhang/Abhängigkeit zwichen Bildung und der Inklusion oder Exklusion von Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund auf dem Arbeitsmarkt beschreiben?
308 Prüffrage: Glauben Sie das höhere Bildung zu einer höheren Integration in den Arbeitsmarkt führt?
Underlying research question: What is the German model of managing diversity in terms of ethnicity/race?
15. Race equality in Germany, how would you describe that? German: Wie würden Sie die Gleichstellung auf Grund von ethnischer Herkunft/Migrationshintergrund in Deutschland beschreiben?
16. The dimension race/ethnic minorities in Germany. How would you describe the debate around this topic? German: Wie würden Sie die öffentliche und politische Debatte um das Thema Migranten/Migrationshintergrund beschreiben?
17. Could you describe the German discrimination debate? German: Wie wird in Deutschland mit dem Diskriminierungsthema umgegangen? Können Sie die öffentliche und politische Debatte beschreiben?
18. Germany and anti-discrimination concerned with race discrimination, how would you describe it? Probe: Could you please describe the German anti-discrimination concerned with race discrimination debate? German: Antidiskrimierung aufgrund von ethnischer Herkunft in Deutschland, wie würden Sie dies beschreiben?
19. Do you think that racial discrimination is recognised as a problem in Germany? If yes/not, explain please. German: Glauben Sie das Diskriminierung aufgrund von ethnischer Herkunft in Deutschland als Problem wahrgenommen wird? Wenn ja/nein, bitte erklären Sie dies.
20. How do you see the difference between a single dimension approach and a multiple approach to include minorities in the labour market? German: Welchen Unterschied sehen sie zwischen einem vertikalen oder horizontalen Ansatz zur Integration/Inklusion von Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund in den Arbeitsmarkt?
Own experience (micro level) and underlying research question: How are decision and opinion leaders influencing managing diversity in Germany, which power do they have?
21. What do you think is diversity and diversity managament? Probe: What is it mean you? Describe it please. German: Was denken Sie ist Diversity und Diversity Management?
309 Prüffrage: Was beudeutet es für Sie? Könnten Sie dies bitte kurz beschreiben.
22. Could you please briefly describe your work in the diversity management field? Probe: How and why (aims) did you started in that field? Probe: How long are you in the field? Probe: Your positions during the time? Probe: Did you influence or changed the field during this time? German: Können Sie mir bitte kurz Ihre Arbeit im Diversity Management Feld beschreiben? Prüffrage: Wie/weshalb haben Sie Ihre Arbeit in diesem Feld begonnen? Prüffrage: Wie lange arbeiten Sie schon in diesem Feld? Prüffrage: Welche verschiedenen Positionen hatten Sie während dieser Zeit? Prüffrage: Haben Sie dabei das Diversity Management Feld in irgendeiner Weise mit Ihrer Arbeit beeinflusst oder auch verändert, wie?
23. Is there a focus on one category in your work?
German: Legen Sie dabei den Fokus auf eine einzelne Diversity Dimension?
24. Which dimension do you see as most important, and why? German: Welche Diversity Dimension ist für Sie die wichtigste, und weshalb?
25. What is gender for you? Describe it please. German: Was ist Gender für Sie? Könnten Sie dies kurz beschreiben?
26. What does working with the gender/ or race topic mean to you? German: Was bedeutet es für Sie mit dem Gender Thema zu arbeiten?
27. What is race for you? Describe it please. German: Was ist “race” für Sie. Bitte beschreiben Sie dies kurz.
28. Are you considering multiple dimensions in your work? Probe: Which dimensions are you considering in your work? Probe: Why you do so/not? Probe: Since when? German: Beziehen Sie mehrere Dimensionen in Ihre Arbeit mit ein? Prüffrage: Welche? Prüffrage: Seit wann? Prüffrage: Weshalb?
29. For which diversity dimensions it is easier to receive research funding at the moment? Can you recognise a change in research
310 funding? What could be the reason for that? And is that affecting your work? If yes, how? German: Für welche Diversity Diemension ist es momentan am einfachsten Drittmittel/Forschungsgelder zu bekommen? Hat sich dies verändert? Was könnte der Grund sein, und beeinflusst dies Ihre Arbeit? Wenn ja, wie genau?
30. Can you describe any advancement in the diversity management/equality in terms of ethnicity/race field since your beginning? Probe: Are some of them initiated by you? German: Können Sie irgendwelche Fortschritte im Diversity Management bezüglich Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund Feld seit Ihres Einstieges beschreiben? Prüffrage: Wurden davon welche von Ihrer Person initiert?
31. Which successes and failures can you describe for your work with the diversity management topic and what are your future goals? German: Welche Erfolge und Misserfolge können Sie für Ihre Arbeit mit diesem Thema beschreiben und was sind ihre Ziele für die Zukunft?
32. How do you see the link between what you are doing and the practice? Which impact does your work have for the practice? German: Wie würden Sie den Link zwischen dem was Sie tun und der Praxis beschreiben? Welche Auswirkung und Einfluss hat Ihre Arbeit auf die Praxis?
33. Are there ethnic minorities in your work team? Are you working with them together? Which impact does it have for your work? German: Gibt es Mitarbeiter mit Migrationshintergrund in Ihrem Team? Arbeiten Sie mit diesen zusammen? Wie beeinflusst dies Ihre “diversity” Arbeit?
Demographics:
Age: German: Alter:
Gender: German: Geschlecht:
Where do you live: German: Wo wohnen Sie?
Nationality: German: Nationalität:
311 Ethnic background: German: Ethnische Herkunft:
Job position and description: German: Berufliche Stellung und Job Beschreibung:
312 Appendix II: Original interview guide for the interviews with case study company employees.
Explanation: This interview is conducted as a part of my research project, which I am doing for my PhD at the Norwich Business School (NBS) at the University of East Anglia in the UK. The aim of this research is to understand the German model of diversity management, in particular in relation to the dimension ethnicity/race. The activation and integration of unused European working population potential, as for example the German migrant and ethnic minority population, is seen as one possibility to cope with current and increasing labour shortages due to demographic changes. Furthermore, discrimination can be seen as an antagonistic dilemma. How the activation and integration of this unused working population potential with diversity management could be achieved is one of my major research questions. For that I will also compare my German results which existing UK literature. I will ask you questions about the state of diversity Management in Germany and your own experiences in the diversity management field. No individual names will be revealed and they will be kept strictly confidential.
German explanation: Dieses Interview wird im Rahmen meiner Doktorarbeit, welche ich an der Norwich Business School (NBS), Universität East Anglia schreibe, erhoben. Das Ziel dieser Untersuchung ist das deutsche Diversity Management Modell zu verstehen und zu beschreiben, insbesondere in der Beziehung zu Migranten und Menschen mit Migrationshintergund. Die Aktivieung und Integration von brachliegendem und ungenutzen europäischen Arbeitskraftpotenzial, wie zum Beispiel von Migranten und Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund, wird als eine Möglichkeit gesehen dem derzeitigen und kommenden Arbeitskräftebedarf entgegen zu wirken. Diskriminierung kann dabei als ein entgegenwirkender Faktor verstanden werden. Wie dieses ungenutzte Arbeitskräftepotenzial mit Diversity Management aktiviert und integriert werden kann ist eine meiner Hauptfragestellungen. Im weiteren Verlauf werde ich meine Ergebisse dann mit schon vorhandener britischen Literatur Vergleichen. Ich werde Ihnen dafür Fragen stellen, erstens zum derzeitigen Status von Diversity Management in Deutschland und zu Ihren eigenen Erfahrungen im Diversity Management Feld. Alle Namen werden dabei anonymisiert und verbleiben vertraulich.
Theme: Everyday life (Social capital, Bourdieu 1977, 1986, 1990, 1991)
1. What would you say on your interest/involvement in political? German: Sind Sie interessiert oder auch involviert in Politik?
313 2. Are you a member of any union, organisation or political party? German: Sind Sie Mitglied irgend eines Vereins, Organisation, oder politischen Partei?
3. Who are in your closer friends groups? German: Wer sind Ihre engeren Freunde?
Theme: Education and Training (cultural capital, Bourdieu 1977, 1986, 1990, 1991)
4. Could you please tell me about your education (the degrees you hold and the institution from which you have received them)? German: Können Sie mir etwas über Ihre Ausbildung sagen (Abschlüsse, wo haben Sie die gemacht)?
5. Have you received any job related training at work? Could you please describe more? German: Haben Sie irgendeine Art von Weiterbildung/Training hier an ihrem Arbeitsplatz bekommen?
Theme: Employment story, career as an experience (Layder 1993)
6. Could you please tell me about your previous employment experience? (previous jobs/positions, years of work, reasons for leave, source of information about employment opportunities, channels of recruitment) German: Können Sie mir etwas über Ihre vorgerige Arbeitserfahrung berichten? (vorherige Jobs/Positionen, weshalb Sie gegangen sind, wie sie an die Stellenausschreibungen gekommen sind, wie wurden Sie rekrutiert)?
7. What were the main impacts on your career? German: Was hat Ihre Karriere am meisten beeinflusst?
314 8. What is the gender/ethnic/ group of the: Employer, employees working in a similar position with you, manager etc? German: Welchem Geschlecht und welcher Ethnie gehören Angestellte in ähnlichen Positionen der Ihren an?
9. Do workers from some (gender/ethnicity etc.) groups receive better pay or amenities for doing the same type of jobs as you are doing? German: Werden Angestellte des anderen Geschlechts oder anderer Ethnien besser bezahlt für die gleiche Arbeit?
10. Do you feel that you are being perceived as belonging to a specific group by the others at work? If yes, does it have any impact on your work and career experiences? German: Glauben Sie das Sie die anderen an ihrem arbeitsplatz, als zu einer anderen Gruppe zugehörig wahrnehmen?
11. Would your career path be different if you were belonged to another ethnic, gender etc. group? How, why? German: Glauben Sie wenn Sie einer anderen Ethnie oder Geschlecht angehören würden wäre Ihre berufliche Laufbahn dann anders verlaufen?
12. Do you consider yourself successful at work? Why, how? German: Sehen Sie sich selbst als erfolgreich in Ihrer Arbeit an? Warum und wie?
13. What are your plans about your future employment and career? German: Was sind Ihre beruflichen Pläne für die Zukunft?
14. Would you please tell me if you want to add more about your current employment experience (such as difficulties, advantages and disadvantages you experienced so far)?
315 German: Möchten Sie noch etwas bezüglich Ihrer derzeitugen Anstellung hinzufügen (z. B. erlebte Schwierigkeiten, Vorteile und Nachteile)?
Theme: Organisational culture and climate (Bourdieu 1992)
15. How would you define the organisational climate/culture in your workplace regarding the issues of inclusion/exclusion and discrimination/equality? German: Wie würden Sie die Organisationskultur (das Klima) an Ihrem Arbeitsplatz in Beziehung zu Diskriminierung und Gleichstellung und Inklusion und Exklusion von Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund beschreiben?
16. How do you evaluate your company’s policy of providing recruitment/training/promotion opportunities to different gender/ethnicity etc. groups? German: Wie beurteilen Sie die Recruitment/Trainings/Förderungsmaßnahmen für verschiedene Geschlechter und ethnische Gruppen?
17. Could you please tell me some about your relationships with your colleagues and superiors at work? German: Können Sie mir bitte etwas über die Beziehung zu Ihren Kollegen und Vorgesetzten an Ihrem Arbeitsplatz erzählen?
18. Do you find it difficult to (or experience problems to) communicate and work with the colleagues from gender/ethnicity groups different than yours? Why, how? German: Finden Sie es schwierig (oder haben sie Problem gehabt) an Ihrem Arbeitsplatz mit Kollegen des anderen Geschlechts oder anderen ethnischen Gruppen zu kommunizieren?
19. How do you feel yourself (belonged to the company or as an ‘outsider’)? Why do you feel so?
316 German: Wie fühlen Sie sich hier im Unternehmen (fühlen sich sich dem Unternehmen zugehörig, oder fühlen Sie sich als Outsider)? Weshalb empfinden Sie das so?
20. What would you say about your level of satisfaction at work? Why? German: Wie zufrieden sind Sie hier an Ihrem Arbeitsplatz?
21. Do you feel that you have a say while important decisions about your work are being made? Why? German: Glauben Sie das Sie Mibestimmungsrecht haben, wenn es um Ihre Arbeit geht?
22. Do you think that you are able to realise your potential and use your skills fully in your job? Why? German: Glauben Sie das es Ihnen möglich ist ihr volles Potenzial und Ihre Fähigkeiten zu entfalten in Ihrer Arbeit?
23. How could your work conditions and organisational climate be improved to make you feel more satisfied and belonged? German: Wie könnten Ihre Arbeitsbedingungen verbessert werden, so dass Sie zufriedener sind und sich dazugehörig fühlen?
Theme: Employee attitude towards diversity management
24. Are you informed about your organisation’s Equality or diversity policy? Could you please shortly tell about it? German: Sind Sie über die Gleichstellungs und Diversity Richtlinien und Programme Ihrer Organisation informiert? Können Sie mir kurz was darüber erzählen?
25. Who do you think is the target of the Equality or diversity policy programs? German: Was glauben Sie ist das Ziel dieser Richtlinien und Programme?
317 26. Did you participate in any of programmes or activities within the scope of Equality or diversity policy program? What was the nature of it? Who were the participants? How did you find it? German: Haben Sie an irgendwelchen Programmen dieser Art teilgenommen?
27. How would you evaluate the impact of Equality or diversity policy programs on the organisational climate? German: Wie würden Sie die Auswirkung/Einfluss dieser Programme auf das organisationale Klima beschreiben?
28. What is the impact of your company’s Equality or diversity policy policy on you? German: Was ist der Einfluss/Auswirkung dieser Programme auf Sie selbst?
29. Do you feel convinced about the necessity of Equality or diversity policy programs? Why? German: Sind Sie davon überzeugt das diese Richtlinien/Programme nötig sind? Weshalb?
Demographics:
Age: German: Alter:
Gender: German: Geschlecht:
Where do you live: German: Wo wohnen Sie?
Nationality: German: Nationalität:
Ethnic background: German: Ethnische Herkunft:
Job position and description: German: Berufliche Stellung und Job Beschreibung:
318 Appendix III: Original interview guide for the interviews with case study company manager
Explanation: This interview is conducted as a part of my research project, which I am doing for my PhD at the Norwich Business School (NBS) at the University of East Anglia in the UK. The aim of this research is to understand the German model of diversity management, in particular in relation to the dimension ethnicity/race. The activation and integration of unused European working population potential, as for example the German migrant and ethnic minority population, is seen as one possibility to cope with current and increasing labour shortages due to demographic changes. Furthermore, discrimination can be seen as an antagonistic dilemma. How the activation and integration of this unused working population potential with diversity management could be achieved is one of my major research questions. For that I will also compare my German results which existing UK literature. I will ask you questions about the state of diversity Management in Germany and your own experiences in the diversity management field. No individual names will be revealed and they will be kept strictly confidential. All information is confidential.
German explanation: Dieses Interview wird im Rahmen meiner Doktorarbeit, welche ich an der Norwich Business School (NBS), Universität East Anglia schreibe, erhoben. Das Ziel dieser Untersuchung ist das deutsche Diversity Management Modell zu verstehen und zu beschreiben, insbesondere in der Beziehung zu Migranten und Menschen mit Migrationshintergund. Die Aktivieung und Integration von brachliegendem und ungenutzen europäischen Arbeitskraftpotenzial, wie zum Beispiel von Migranten und Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund, wird als eine Möglichkeit gesehen dem derzeitigen und kommenden Arbeitskräftebedarf entgegen zu wirken. Diskriminierung kann dabei als ein entgegenwirkender Faktor verstanden werden. Wie dieses ungenutzte Arbeitskräftepotenzial mit Diversity Management aktiviert und integriert werden kann ist eine meiner Hauptfragestellungen. Im weiteren Verlauf werde ich meine Ergebisse dann mit schon vorhandener britischen Literatur Vergleichen. Ich werde Ihnen dafür Fragen stellen, erstens zum derzeitigen Status von Diversity Management in Deutschland und zu Ihren eigenen Erfahrungen im Diversity Management Feld. Alle Namen werden dabei anonymisiert und verbleiben vertraulich. Alle Information bleiben ebenfalls vertraulich.
Theme: Organisational culture and climate (habitus, Bourdieu 1992)
1. Do you know the diversity management concept? Probe: What is it for you? Could you please describe it?
German: Kennen Sie das Diversity management Konzept?
319 Prüffrage: Was bedeutet das Konzept für Sie? Könnten Sie das bitte beschreiben?
2. What do you think are the key drivers for ethnical diversity management in your organisation?
German: Was denken Sie, sind die Hauptantriebskräfte für Diversity Management in Ihrem Unternehmen?
3. For how important do you see a diverse workforce for your company? And for your work area? Why
German: Für wie wichtig halten Sie eine diverse Belegschaft für Ihr Unternehmen? Für Ihren Arbeitsbereich? Warum?
4. Do you think that a diverse workforce could be beneficial for your work area? Which? Why?
German: Glauben Sie eine diverse Belegschaft Vorteile für Ihren Arbeitsbereich haben könnte? Weche? Weshalb?
5. Do you think that a homogeny workforce could be beneficial for your work area? Which? Why?
German: Glauben Sie eine homogene Belegschaft Vorteile für Ihren Arbeitsbereich haben könnte? Weche? Weshalb?
6. Do you agree that the workforce should reflect the diverse ethnical communities in Germany? If not, please give us your views.
German: Die Belegschaft sollte die diversen Ethischen Gruppen der bevölkerung reflektieren. Stimmen Sie dem zu? Weshalb?
7. Why you should have a racial equality and diversity policy in your organisation? Why do you think it is important?
German: Weshalb sollte man eine ethinsche Gleichstellungs und Diversity Policy haben?
8. Why do you think you do not have a racial equality and diversity policy until now? What could be the reason?
German: Was glauben Sie, weshalb haben Sie bisher keine ethinsche Gleichstellungs und Diversity Policy?
320 9. Do you think your company needs a racial equality and diversity policy? Why?
German: Glauben Sie ihr Unternehmen benötigt eine ethinsche Gleichstellungs und Diversity Policy? Weshalb?
10. Would you agree in the implementation of a racial equality and diversity policy? Why?
German: Würden Sie die implementierung einer ethinsche Gleichstellungs und Diversity Policy befürworten? Weshalb?
11. Which categories should be covered by your equal opportunities or diversity policy? Should there be a focus on one category? Why?
German: Welche Kategorien sollten durch eine Gleichstellungs und Diversity Policy abgedeckt werden? Sollte ein Fokus auf eine bestimmet Kategorie gelegt werden? Weshalb?
12. Why do you think your company is employing nearly none workers with migration background? Reasons?
German: Was denken Sie weshalb ihr Unternehmen bisher keine Angestellten mit Migrationshintergrund angestellt hat? Gründe?
13. How do you think would it be to work together with people with migration background?
German: Was glauben Sie wie wäre es mit Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund zusammen zu arbeiten?
14. Do you think the organisational culture in your company is open for ethnic minority workers? Also in higher Positions?
German: Glauben Sie das die organisationskultur Ihres Unternehmens offen ist für Angstellte mit Migrationshintergrund? Auch in höheren Positionen?
15. How would you define the organisational climate/culture in your workplace regarding the issues of inclusion/exclusion and discrimination/equality?
321 German: Wie würden Sie die Organisationskultur (das Klima) an Ihrem Arbeitsplatz in Beziehung zu Diskriminierung und Gleichstellung und Inklusion und Exklusion von Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund beschreiben?
16. Would your career path be different if you were belonged to another ethnic, gender etc. group? How, why?
German: Glauben Sie wenn Sie einer anderen Ethnie oder Geschlecht angehören würden wäre Ihre berufliche Laufbahn dann anders verlaufen?
Background questions:
Age: German: Alter:
Gender: German: Geschlecht:
Where do you live: German: Wo wohnen Sie?
Nationality: German: Nationalität:
Ethnic background: German: Ethnische Herkunft:
Job position and description: German: Berufliche Stellung und Job Beschreibung:
Could you please tell me about your education (the degrees you hold and the institution from which you have received them)? German: Können Sie mir etwas über Ihre Ausbildung sagen (Abschlüsse, wo haben Sie die gemacht)?
Who are in your closer friends groups? German: Wer sind Ihre engeren Freunde?
322 Appendix IV: Original interview guide for the interviews with members of the Human Resource department in the case study company
Explanation: This interview is conducted as a part of my research project, which I am doing for my PhD at the Norwich Business School (NBS) at the University of East Anglia in the UK. The aim of this research is to understand the German model of diversity management, in particular in relation to the dimension ethnicity/race. The activation and integration of unused European working population potential, as for example the German migrant and ethnic minority population, is seen as one possibility to cope with current and increasing labour shortages due to demographic changes. Furthermore, discrimination can be seen as an antagonistic dilemma. How the activation and integration of this unused working population potential with diversity management could be achieved is one of my major research questions. For that I will also compare my German results which existing UK literature. I will ask you questions about the state of diversity Management in Germany and your own experiences in the diversity management field. No individual names will be revealed and they will be kept strictly confidential. All information is confidential.
German explanation: Dieses Interview wird im Rahmen meiner Doktorarbeit, welche ich an der Norwich Business School (NBS), Universität East Anglia schreibe, erhoben. Das Ziel dieser Untersuchung ist das deutsche Diversity Management Modell zu verstehen und zu beschreiben, insbesondere in der Beziehung zu Migranten und Menschen mit Migrationshintergund. Die Aktivieung und Integration von brachliegendem und ungenutzen europäischen Arbeitskraftpotenzial, wie zum Beispiel von Migranten und Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund, wird als eine Möglichkeit gesehen dem derzeitigen und kommenden Arbeitskräftebedarf entgegen zu wirken. Diskriminierung kann dabei als ein entgegenwirkender Faktor verstanden werden. Wie dieses ungenutzte Arbeitskräftepotenzial mit Diversity Management aktiviert und integriert werden kann ist eine meiner Hauptfragestellungen. Im weiteren Verlauf werde ich meine Ergebisse dann mit schon vorhandener britischen Literatur Vergleichen. Ich werde Ihnen dafür Fragen stellen, erstens zum derzeitigen Status von Diversity Management in Deutschland und zu Ihren eigenen Erfahrungen im Diversity Management Feld. Alle Namen werden dabei anonymisiert und verbleiben vertraulich. Alle Information bleiben ebenfalls vertraulich.
Theme: Diversity and equality in the organisation (habitus, Bourdieu 1992)
1. What is the diversity management concept for you? Probe: Could you please describe it?
German: Was ist das Diversity management Konzept für Sie? Prüffrage: Könnten Sie das bitte beschreiben?
323
2. Does your organisation have a diversity management programme or initiative?
German: Hat Ihre Organisation ein Diversity Management Programm oder Initiative?
3. Do you have a written diversity or equal opportunities statement? Probe: If yes, does it specify the consequences of violating the policy?
German: Gibt es ein Diversity- oder Gleichstellungsstatement in schriftlicher Form? Prüffrage: Wenn ja, werden dort Konsequenzen bei der Nichteinhaltung der Policy angeführt?
4. Is there a specialised diversity office in your organisation? Probe: If no, is there a plan to open an office in the future?
German: Haben sie ein spezialisiertes Diversity Büro in Ihrer Organisation? Prüffrage: Falls nicht, ist eines für die Zukunft geplant?
5. How do you explain the difference between the global diversity approach of your organisation to the national approach?
German: Wie erklären Sie den Unterschied zwischen dem Global Diversity Management Ansatz ihres Unternehmens zu dem nationalen Ansatz?
6. Does your organisation have someone whose main reponsibility is the requirements of the Equal Treatment Law?
German: Gibt es jemanden in Ihrer Organisation der für die Anforderungen des Gleichstellungsgesetzes zuständig ist?
7. Does your organisation have a unit for discrimination complains for empoyees?
German: Gibt es eine Stelle wo Angestellte Diskriminierung melden können? Prüffrage: Wie viele Fälle konnten Sie bisher verezeichen?
8. Are you providing awarness and diversity trainings fort he stuff? Probe: Which employees? Probe: How many employees until now?
German: Gibt es Diversity oder Senssibilisierungstrainings für die Mitareiter?
324 Prüffrage: Welche Mitarbeiter? Prüffrage: Wie viele Mitarbeiter wurden bisher trainiert?
9. Which effects had the Equal Treatment Law on your work?
German: Welche Auswirkungen hatte das AGG auf Ihre Arbeit? Welche Maßnahmen wurden ergriffen?
10. How ist he proportion of female and workers with migration background in your organisations?
German: Wie sind die Anteile von Frauen und Arbeitskräften mit Migartionshintergrund in Ihrer Belegschaft?
11. What is the ethnicity composition of your applicants?
German: Was ist die ethnische Komposition der Bewerber?
12. Do you think that there is a different pattern in terms of recruitemnet of native born Germans and people with migration background?
German: Glauben Sie das man Arbeitskräfte mit Migrationshintergrund anders anwerben muss als Deutsche?
13. Do you do anything to attract people with migration background or women specifically? Probe: Could you explain Probe: If not, why?
German: Tun Sie etwas um Arbeitskräfte mit Migrationshintergrund und Frauen anzuwerben? Prüffrage: Was genau? Prüffrage: Wenn nicht, weshalb?
14. Could you tell us how gender and ethnicity is adressed in your operations? Probe: In your recruitment practices? Probe: Assesment Center practices?
German: Wie sind Gender und Ethnizitäts Aspekte in Ihren Operationen integriert? Prüffrage: In Ihren Rekrutierungspraktiken? Prüffrage: Assesment Center Praktiken?
15. How do you recruit people? Probe: Adverstise, internet, newspaper?
325 German: Wie rekrutieren Sie neue Mitarbeiter? Prüffrage: Werbung, Internet, Zeitungen
16. Do you have a spezial target group when recruiting people?
German: Haben sie eine bestimmte Zielgruppe wenn sie rekrutieren?
17. To what extend is your company aware of the changing leabour trends? What do you thinh about demographic change?
German: Zu welchem Ausmaß ist sich Ihr Unternehmen der Veränderten Arbeitsmarkttrends bewusst? Was denken Sie über den demographischen Wandel?
18. What about trends regarding the supply and demand of labour, for example do you experience any difficulties in recruiting certain hires?
German: Erleben Sie aufgrund des demographischen Wandels schon Schwierigkeiten bei der Rekrutierung von Angestellten?
19. How do you think you can handle this labour shortage?
German: Was glauben Sie wie Sie diesen Arbeitskräftemangel händeln können?
Theme: Organisational culture and climate (habitus, Bourdieu 1992) 20. What do you think are the key drivers for ethnical diversity management in your organisation? Which persons or units could be drivers and which barriers?
German: Was denken Sie, sind die Hauptantriebskräfte für Diversity Management in Ihrem Unternehmen? Welche Personen oder Abteilungen könnten Antriebskräfte und welche Barrieren sein?
21. For how important do you see a diverse workforce for your company? And for your work area? Why
German: Für wie wichtig halten Sie eine diverse Belegschaft für Ihr Unternehmen? Für Ihren Arbeitsbereich? Warum?
22. Do you think that a diverse workforce could be beneficial for your work area? Which? Why?
German: Glauben Sie eine diverse Belegschaft Vorteile für Ihren Arbeitsbereich haben könnte? Weche? Weshalb?
326 23. Do you think it is easier to work in a diverse or homogeny team? Probe: Could you tell me reasons?
German: Ist es einfacher in einem homogenen oder in einem diversen Team zu arbeiten? Prüffrage? Bitte nennen Sie Gründe.
24. Do you agree that the workforce should reflect the diverse ethnical communities in Germany? If not, please give us your views.
German: Die Belegschaft sollte die diversen Ethischen Gruppen der bevölkerung reflektieren. Stimmen Sie dem zu? Weshalb?
25. Why you should have a racial equality and diversity policy in your organisation? Why do you think it is important?
German: Weshalb sollte man eine ethinsche Gleichstellungs und Diversity Policy haben?
26. Why do you think you do not have a racial equality and diversity policy until now? What could be the reason?
German: Was glauben Sie, weshalb haben Sie bisher keine ethinsche Gleichstellungs und Diversity Policy?
27. Do you think your company needs a racial equality and diversity policy? Why?
German: Glauben Sie ihr Unternehmen benötigt eine ethinsche Gleichstellungs und Diversity Policy? Weshalb?
28. Would you agree in the implementation of a racial equality and diversity policy? Why?
German: Würden Sie die implementierung einer ethinsche Gleichstellungs und Diversity Policy befürworten? Weshalb?
29. Which categories should be covered by your equal opportunities or diversity policy? Should there be a focus on one category? Why?
German: Welche Kategorien sollten durch eine Gleichstellungs und Diversity Policy abgedeckt werden? Sollte ein Fokus auf eine bestimmet Kategorie gelegt werden? Weshalb?
30. How do you think would it be to work together with people with migration background?
327 German: Was glauben Sie wie wäre es mit Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund zusammen zu arbeiten?
31. Do you think the organisational culture in your company is open for ethnic minority workers? Also in higher Positions?
German: Glauben Sie das die organisationskultur Ihres Unternehmens offen ist für Angstellte mit Migrationshintergrund? Auch in höheren Positionen?
32. How would you define the organisational climate/culture in your workplace regarding the issues of inclusion/exclusion and discrimination/equality?
German: Wie würden Sie die Organisationskultur (das Klima) an Ihrem Arbeitsplatz in Beziehung zu Diskriminierung und Gleichstellung und Inklusion und Exklusion von Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund beschreiben?
33. Would your career path be different if you were belonged to another ethnic, gender etc. group? How, why?
German: Glauben Sie wenn Sie einer anderen Ethnie oder Geschlecht angehören würden wäre Ihre berufliche Laufbahn dann anders verlaufen?
Background questions:
Age: German: Alter:
Gender: German: Geschlecht:
Where do you live: German: Wo wohnen Sie?
Nationality: German: Nationalität:
Ethnic background: German: Ethnische Herkunft:
Job position and description: German: Berufliche Stellung und Job Beschreibung:
328 Could you please tell me about your education (the degrees you hold and the institution from which you have received them)? German: Können Sie mir etwas über Ihre Ausbildung sagen (Abschlüsse, wo haben Sie die gemacht)?
Who are in your closer friends groups?
329